mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

Title & dedication in GC

Title & dedication in GE1

Title & dedication in GE2 (→GE3)

Title & dedication in FE

Title & dedication in EE1 & EE3

Title in EE2

Our suggestion
..

In the main text we give the title and dedication after the title page of the entire opus in GC and FE.
See the Etude in A major, No. 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Dedications , GE revisions

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

 

in FE

in EE
..

All three source indications of the tempo-character are almost certainly authentic (vivace and assai – certainly, non tanto – highly likely). It means that Chopin changed his mind on this issue at least twice, yet the order of the changes is unknown – we only know that assai is later than vivace, as in GC there is a relevant correction. Chopin's hesitation concerned rather terminology than the actual tempo of the Etude, as the later added metronome tempo is the same for all three indications. The choice of one of them is then of a minor practical meaning. In the main text we give assai, with which Chopin replaced vivace, which seems to correspond better to the fast (for the rhythm and texture used in the Etude) tempo indicated by the metronome.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Chopin's hesitations , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 1-8

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

Accents in GC (→GE) & EE

No marks in FE
..

The accents in GC (→GE) were added by Chopin, at the same time replacing a few   signs in bars 1-4. The missing accents in FE must be considered as Chopin's inaccuracy. See also bar 8.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections in GC

b. 1-24

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

Slurs in GC (→GE) & FE

Slurs in EE
..

EE consistently displays a different slurring of the basic figure in the R.H. in the entire Etude. It is rather a result of a different interpretation of Chopin's autograph by the engraver or copyist than differentiated Chopin notation. In the main text we give the version of two sources – GC and FE – which does not yet mean that the shorter slurs of EE must be considered as inaccurate, particularly considering the fact that neither musical nor pianistic issues give grounds for considering one of these versions to be clearly better. However, the longer slurs are supported by the visible in GC minor corrections of the slurs (e.g., in bar 34), proving the general acceptance of the three-note slurs by Chopin.
In the figures as at the beginning of bar 5 (bars 5-7, 13-15 and 21-23), beginning the slurs in EE under the top note is almost certainly an arbitrary decision of the engraver.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 4

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

c1-d1-f1 in GC (→GE) & EE

a-c1-f1 in FE
..

The version of FE is earlier – in GC one can see a correction, in which a was deleted, while d1 probably added. A similar change might have been introduced to the base text to EE. According to us, both versions are stylistically more or less equal, and ten years later Chopin did not see a reason to change the original version in pupil's copies.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections in GC