Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 1-3

composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

No slur in AI & FE (→GE,EE)

Slur in A

..

The slur, dividing (among others) the parts of both hands written on the bottom stave, was omitted in the editions, probably due to graphic difficulties.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

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 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Metronome marking with time signature in GC (→GE)

Metronome marking at start of Etude in FE & EE

..

Placing the metronome indication already at the beginning of the Etude may be a result of the routine interpretation of the engravers of FE and EE who did not see a reason to separate it from the Lento indication. Cf. the Etude in A minor, No. 11, bars 1-5.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies