Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
|
b. 46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In the main text we give the hairpins on the basis of #GC, in which the range of the sign is compatible with the natural course of the music. The slightly longer hairpins of EE are probably authentic too. In turn, the sign of FE could have been shortened or moved due to the lack of possibility of its legible placement on the 2nd beat of the bar. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 53-54
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In the main text, we give the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
All source notations certainly mean the same – an accent referring to both notes struck in the middle of the bar. In the main text we adopt the version with two accents – see bars 13-14. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 64
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
All sources have one accent at the beginning and in the middle of the bar, placed between the parts of both hands. In the notation of FC (→GE), the accents refer to both hands (it is particularly clear in GE2 and GE3 due to the changed graphic layout of the notes) and this is the notation we give in the main text. Alternatively, we suggest an equal notation with two pairs of accents. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 67-69
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In the main text, we add an accent over the part of the R.H. – see bars 13-14. The cases of omitted accents in GE1 and EE1 (→EE2) – see bars 68-69. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
in 
in 
