Issues : Authentic corrections in GC
|
b. 45
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The sources give two version of pedalling – one-bar-long in GC (→GE) and EE1 and half-bar-long in FE and EE2 (→EE3). Both versions are certainly authentic and the pedalling of FE can be later – cf. bars 46-48. In the main text we give, however, the first one, as it was written in GC with Chopin's hand and – which could be perhaps meaningful – is present together with the enriched version of the 3rd crochet of the bar. Similarly in bar 47. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 47
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The g crotchet, which in this context has to be, of course, interpreted as g category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Omission of current key accidentals , Authentic corrections in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 49
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
It is hard to say how the situation, in which category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 50-51
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The shorter ("triplet") slur in FE is the original version, changed by Chopin in GC (→GE) and – probably – in the base text to EE. Similar corrections of slurring were introduced by Chopin in GC also in bars 51 and 52. Not having an insight into the base text of EE, we cannot state whether leading the slur until the beginning of bar 51 in this edition corresponds to Chopin's notation. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Triplet slurs , Authentic corrections in GC |
||||||||
|
b. 51-52
|
composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor
..
The original slurring of this bar included – same as in bar 50 – only the slur on the 4th beat of the bar (the "triplet" one). It is proved by extension of this slur in GC (→GE) performed with Chopin's hand. Chopin introduced a similar correction probably in the base text to EE, however, it is not certain whether he actually linked the added slur to the previous one or whether it is a result of misinterpretation of the manuscript. In turn, the double slur of FE indicates a highly likely correction of Chopin in print – adding the second slur does not require as much workload of the engraver as "extending" the already printed one, which is related to deletion of its part or of the entire slur. In the main text we give the undoubtedly authentic slur of GC (→GE), confirmed by a possible Chopin's correction in FE. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections in GC |
in 
was added in 
written in 
