mUltimate Chopin

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 1, Etude in A♭ major

 in bar 1 in AI, FE & EE

 from anacrusis in A (→GE)
..

It is not clear whether according to Chopin the  mark refers to the crotchet of the upbeat or to the entrance of the L.H. Similar marks in bars 4, 5, 8, 12, 16 (of these on the 1st page of A) are written clearly before the note they concern, which would point to the second possibility. Such pedalling is given by FE and EE. In the main text we adopt the interpretation of GE – pedal from the upbeat:

  • it is compatible with the literal interpretation of A – the  mark fits entirely before the bar line, while it begins even slightly before the crotchet rest,
  • such pedalling is natural both in terms of sound and piano technique,
  •  and  marks are in a similar place in A, while the dynamic indication is certainly binding from the beginning of the piece.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

b. 1

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

No title nor dedication in AT

Title in AW & CDP

Title & dedication in GC

Title & dedication in GE1
 
 

Title & dedication in EE1 & EE3
 
 
..

In the main text we give the title and dedication according to 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 2, Etude in F minor

in AT

in AW

in CDP, GC (→GE), FE & EE
..

Initially, Chopin – in AT and AW – considered Agitato to be a more important indication characterising the Etude than Presto, which he wrote only in AT. However, eventually, while preparing the work for print, he decided to leave Presto only. According to us, it can reflect the change of the piece's character, perhaps together with clarification of the concept of the entire opus.
In the earlier manuscripts there is no metronome tempo.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Metronome tempos , Changes of tempo markings

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 2, Etude in F minor

No indication in AT

sempre sotto voce in AW

 in CDP, GC (→GE), FE & EE
..

In AW the only indication concerning dynamics is sempre sotto voce, written under the part of the L.H. In the version prepared for print, Chopin replaced it with a  indication, referring to both hands.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations