Issues : Errors in FE
|
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
It is hard to assume how the difference between the versions of FE and EE1 and these of FC (→GE) and EE2 (→EE3) occurred. In FC, the naturals introducing a are written by the copyist, which means that they were present in the manuscript, probably an autograph copied by Fontana. Therefore, the absence of these signs in FE and EE1 could be explained by their later deletion by Chopin in the base texts to these editions. Hence a regular, chromatic progression of minor thirds in the middle voices would be then introduced only in bar 54 as a kind of variation of the repetition of this place. However, not being certain if it was so – the versions of FE and EE1 could have been results of mistakes – in the main text we give the undoubtedly authentic version of FC (→GE). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Last key signature sign |
||||||||
|
b. 11
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
FE has an f1 instead of a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error , Annotations in FES |
||||||||
|
b. 81-82
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
The accents in the R.H., present only in FE, could have been added by Chopin in the proofreading of this edition. According to us, it is, however, more likely that Chopin wrote in the base text only the first accent, while in FE it was multiplied, interpreting the repetition signs, used for an abbreviated notation of the following semiquaver groups. Taking this into account, in the main text we suggest only one accent and due to the fact that it closes the regular rhythmic and melodic structure of bars 71-80, we adjust its shape and placement to the previous accents. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Errors in FE |
in 
