mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : 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

b. 26

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

..

In CLI and FE (→EE) there is no  returning e2 on the 12th semiquaver. This version, with repeated e2, although acceptable from the musical point of view, is however certainly a mistake, which is proved by the  before the next e2, which is legitimate only when the discussed note sounds as e2. The correct text can be found in Ap and GE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors of CLI

b. 27

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

..

In CLI and FEcor there are no accidentals before the fourth in the lower voice, which is certainly a mistake.
CLI and FE (→GE1→GE2→GE4,→EE) have an unnecessary  before b2 in this place.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of CLI

b. 27-28

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

..

In CLI the last beat of bar 27 and the 1st half of bar 28 are written in the part of the R.H. with the use of an octave sign, which, however, stops at the end of bar 27. The mechanical error of the copyist leaves no place for doubts, as there is no loco indication, with which the return to the written pitch was indicated back then. The musical context also unanimously indicates the place where the octave sign was supposed to end.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors of CLI

b. 29

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

..

In CLI and FEcor there is no  returning e2 on the 8th semiquaver in the bar. The sign was added in a later proofreading of FE (→GE,EE); it is also present in Ap.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of CLI