Issues : Errors in GE
|
b. 13
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 29
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , 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 |
||||||||||||||
|
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 |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 68-69
|
composition: Op. 25 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
GE1 does not include any accent in bar 68, whereas in EE1 (→EE2) there is no accent in the middle of bar 69 (similarly in bar 70). These patent errors were corrected in GE2 (→GE3) and EE3. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
instead of F
