mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : 4/4 or 2/2

b. 1

composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

in AI

in FE (→GE,EE)
..

We give the time signature marking after AI, although theoretically, Chopin could have introduced  in the lost [A]. According to us, it is, however, much more likely that it was an arbitrary change of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE), who did not use the  marking in the Etudes​ – contrary to the manuscripts – even once, cf. the Etudes in C major, No. 1, F major, No. 8 and C minor, No. 12. The phenomenon is also present in other pieces, even in the most obvious cases, e.g., in the Etudes in F minor, Op. 25 No. 2, D major, Op. 25 No. 8 or F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor

in AW, GC (→GE) & EE3

in CDP, FE & EE1 (→EE2)
..

The use of  time signature is surprising only in CDP and EE, as in FE the  indication in the Etudes – contrary to the manuscripts – was not used at all, neither in Op. 25 nor in Op. 10 and the Etude in F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1 (see also the Impromptu in A major, Op. 29). In any case, the correctness and authenticity of the  time signature leaves no doubts – a two-beat bar is written in two autographs (AT and AW) and in GC, based on an autograph.
The revision of EE3 could have been performed after having compared it with one of GE.

AT has a 2/4 time signature, which is a part of the original rhythmic notation of the Etude, discussed in the adjacent note.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Changes of metre , Inaccuracies in FE , 4/4 or 2/2

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

in A (→FC), EE & GE2 (→GE3)

in FE & GE1
..

The use of  time signature is not surprising only in GE1, as FE does not use the  indication in the Etudes – contrary to the manuscripts – at all, neither in Op. 10 nor in the Etude in F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1 (cf. also the Impromptu in A major, Op. 29). In any case, the correctness and authenticity of the  time signature does not raise any doubts thanks to A (→FC). The correct time signature was returned in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Changes of metre , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , 4/4 or 2/2

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 6, Etude in G♯ minor

in FC, EE & GE2 (→GE3)

in FE & GE1
..

The use of  time signature surprises only in GE1, as FE did not use the  indication in the Etudes – contrary to the manuscripts – even once, neither in Op. 25 nor in Op. 10 and the Etude in F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1 (cf. also the Impromptu in A major, Op. 29). In any case, the correctness and authenticity of the  time signature is undeniable with respect to the compatible version of FC and EE. The correct time signature was returned in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Changes of metre , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , 4/4 or 2/2

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 8, Etude in D♭ major

in A (→GE)

in FE & EE
..

The use of the  time signature is surprising only in EE, as in FE the  time signature was not used in the Etudes even once – contrary to the manuscripts – neither in Op. 25 nor in Op. 10, in the Etude in F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1 (cf. the Impromptu in A major, Op. 29). Anyways, the correctness and authenticity of the  time signature written by Chopin in A (→GE) is beyond any doubt.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Changes of metre , Inaccuracies in FE , 4/4 or 2/2