Verbal indications
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In the main text, we give the title and dedication after the title page of the entire Opus in FC and FE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Dedications , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 15-17
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
In FC one can see deletions of dynamic indications – category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 33-39
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
The twelve-bar crescendo (bars 31-42) was precisely marked in FC, EE and GE2 (→GE3). Shortening the range in GE1 is certainly a mistake of the engraver – the dashes were led only to the end of the page. The lack of dashes in FE has also to be considered an inaccuracy of notation. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 40-43
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
The missing category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 57-67
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
The difference in the scope of the dashes marking the range of the cresc. indication are probably non-authentic. The lack of dashes – total in FE and partial in FC – is most probably a result of inaccuracies of the engraver and copyist. The engraver would often forget about the dashes, whereas the copyist would lead his to the end of the page, which makes their later omission highly likely. The version of GE1 is certainly erroneous (dashes led to the end of the line), while the addition introduced in GE2 (→GE3) – non-authentic (which, however, does not exclude its compatibility with Chopin's intention). In this situation, we consider the version of EE to be most certain, in which the range of dashes can correspond to both the notation and intention of Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
major, 
in bar 15 and 
in bar 17. It seems to prove a radical change of the dynamic concept of this fragment (probably until bar 23, in which there is 
), yet it is possible that Chopin only thought that it is not the only possible concept and he did not want to impose it upon the performers. Resignation from these indications can also be explained taking their placement as the starting point – both were written more or less under the 2nd beat of the bar, hence they could have referred to the extended passages, filling the sound of the accentuated notes opening the bars. The composer could have then assumed that such an evident attenuation is not necessary in order to achieve an effect of the phrase's continuity.
in 
