mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of CLI

b. 15

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

..

In CLI the entire bar is written one octave lower. In the manuscripts also the adjacent bars are entirely written one octave lower, yet both bar 14 and 16 are included under an octave sign. Therefore, there is no doubt that bar 15 was also meant to be marked like that. The copyist must have totally lost it, as at the beginning of bar 15 he even wrote loco, with which an end of the octave sign was designated back then, while in bar 16 he started a new indication.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors of CLI

b. 19-20

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

..

In none of the authentic sources the notation of the accidentals in the part of the R.H. is entirely correct in these bars – particularly in bar 19. However, the inaccuracies do not pose problems in establishing the correct text. Moreover, in all sources except for Ap the unnecessary  before f2, the 14th semiquaver in bar 20, is repeated. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of CLI

b. 22

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

..

In CLI the 10th semiquaver is written as an a2, which constitutes a natural cause of changes in the notation of the accidentals appearing in the further part of the bar. Lack of the  returning g2 on the penultimate semiquaver is, however, a patent error. In the majority of sources there is a reminding (?)  before the last note in the bar – only Ap and GE4 (→GE5) omit this rather unnecessary sign. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Errors of CLI

b. 23-24

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

E in CLI

Octave in FE (→GE,EE)
..

According to us, lack of the bass' octave strengthening in CLI is not the original version, but rather the copyist's error (overseeing two 8s indicating lower octaves). Such abbreviated notation of the octaves in this place is included in FE (→GE). 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Abbreviated octaves' notation , Errors of CLI

b. 25-26

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

..

In the 1st half of bar 25 CLI includes the clearly earlier notation with the use of sharps instead of flats (d3 and a2 instead of e3 and b2). The notation was not repeated by Chopin in any of the remaining sources. Moreover, in three situations CLI does not refer to the sharp put before the previous note – naturals before the 9th semiquaver in both bars and the 13th semiquaver in bar 25 are missing. Only the last situation may be considered as an obvious error, as in the first two cases the inaccuracy is not striking due to the octave sign, which ends in the middle of the bar, as a result of which, the devoid of the sign note is one octave higher than the previous one (the same inaccuracy occurs in Ap in bar 26).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Enharmonic corrections , Errors of CLI