mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in FE

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major

in CLI

in FE1

in FE2

in GE1

GE1a (→GE2→GE3→GE4→GE5)

in EE2 (→EE3)

in EE4
..

In the main text we give the title as adopted in FE and confirmed in the engraver's copy of several Etudes (No. 5-8 and 12). The title included in CLI, although earlier, is also authentic – Chopin himself described in this way one of his etudes in a letter to a friend – and reflects Chopin's pragmatic approach to the issue of the pieces' names (cf. the original title of Berceuse Op. 57, "Variants"). Therefore, it is hard to assume that the extended titles of GE and EE were something more than a marketing ploy of the publishers, which, after all, were gladly used also in case of other genres, e.g., in waltzes, in which the authentic titles were extended with different adjectives: 'grande' in Op. 18, 24, 42, 'brillante' in Op. 34, 'nouvelle' in Op. 42 (see also Etudes Op. 25).

We also give this dedication in the version of FE (→GE). Its extension in EE seems to be rather an idea of the publisher who, however, could have agreed it with Chopin. Apart from FE1 (→EE2→EE3), the erroneous initial of Liszt's name (J) also appears in some copies of FE2 and GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , GE revisions , Various titles

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor

in CLI

in Ap

in FE1

in FE2

in GE1

GE1a (→GE2→GE3→GE4→GE5)

in EE2 (→EE3)

in EE4
..

In the main text we give the title and dedication in the undoubtedly authentic version adopted in FE. The extensions of both the title (in GE and EE) and the dedication (in EE) most probably come from the editors. See the Etude in C major, No. 1, bar 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , GE revisions , Various titles

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor

in Ap

in FEcor

in FE (→GE1→GE2, →EE)

in GE3 (→GE4→GE5)
..

In the main text we give the tempo indications added by Chopin in subsequent proofs of FE (→GE1→GE2, →EE): Allegro already in FEcor, metronome tempo in the next one. In GE3 (→GE4→GE5) the metronome marking erroneously displays 114.
Different indications written in Ap may not have a universal value, as the Etude in this autograph differs quite significantly from the published version in terms of pianistics.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Changes of metre , Errors in GE , Metronome tempos , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

in A

in FE1

in FE2

in GE

in EE3

in EE4
..

In the main text we give the title and dedication in the undoubtedly authentic version adopted in FE. The extensions of both the title (in GE and EE) and dedication (in EE) most probably come from the editors. See the Etude in C major, No. 1, bar 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , GE revisions

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

in A

in FE (→GE,EE) 
..

We give the time signature after A. Although FE (→GE,EE) displays , it is, however, difficult to assume that the change of time signature was intentional if in FE the  was not used in Etudes even once (contrary to the manuscripts), cf. the Etude in C major, No. 1, C minor, No. 4 and F major, No. 8. The phenomenon also applies to other pieces, even in the most obvious cases, e.g., in the Etude in F minor, Op. 25 No. 2, D major, Op. 25 No. 8 or F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , 4/4 or 2/2