mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor

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

Slurs

b. 28

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

No slur in CLI & Ap

Slur in FE (→GE,EE) 
..

The slur starting from the G-g octave was written by Chopin in FEcor, yet without determining the final point – in bar 29, which is already on a new line, there is no continuation of this slur. The ambiguity was carefully reproduced in FE (→EE2→EE3), while in GE (and EE4) a natural in this situation ending of the slur was added.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 29

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

No slur in CLI, Ap & FE (→EE2→EE3)

Slur in GE & EE4
..

Chopin did not mark the ending of the slur in FE (→EE2→EE3), whose beginning he wrote himself in FEcor (→FE→GE,EE). We add the only possible addition in this situation, in accordance with the ending of the slur introduced in GE (and EE4).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 29-30

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

..

The slurs combining the E-e octave with the next one were added by Chopin in one of the last proofreadings of FE (→GE,EE). In Ap the octaves are also combined, yet only with the upper slur.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 29-31

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

No slurs in CLI & FE (→GE,EE) 

Slurs in Ap, contextual interpretation
..

We interpret the slur in bar 29 as a continuation of the clearly dragged slur from bar 28. We consider the remaining slurs to be half-bar-long, although in the photocopies available to the editors of mUltimate Chopin, they seem to be shorter. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 30-32

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

Two single slurs in CLI

Double & single slurs in Ap

FE (→EE2→EE3)

GE1 (→GE1a→GE2→GE3)

GE4 (→GE5) & EE4
..

In all sources there are slurs combining tritons with the following octaves (some of them or all). Two slurs in CLI are the only performance markings in this manuscript. In the authentic sources the double slurs do not appear next to all four pairs of two-note chords, however, there are reasons to think that it may be an inaccuracy of the notation. Therefore, in the main text we propose such homogeneous notation, already introduced in EE4 and GE4 (→GE5).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE