|
b. 45-46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In these bars Chopin was also looking for a deft way of marking the accents referring simultaneously to the parts of both hands (cf. bars 29-32 and 41-44). In the main text, in both texts we adopt pairs of accents used in FE – most probably by Chopin – in the 2nd half of bar 46. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 45-46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
The slurs of EE can be erroneous – the engraver or the copyist repeated the slurring of the adjacent bars. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||||
|
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. 46
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
GE1 added a cautionary category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
|
b. 52
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
GE1 has an erroneous G instead of F as the last semiquaver in the L.H., which was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
in 
before the 9th semiquaver in the L.H. The unnecessary sign was removed in