mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in FE

b. 27-28

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

No markings in CLI & FE (→GE,EE) 

 and accents in Ap
..

 and the accents of Ap (also these on the 2nd beat of both bars) highlight the accentuation suggested by the slurs in the L.H., which are also present in FE (→GE,EE). It is unclear how significant the differences in the accents' size and placement of  marks are. We assume that the latter concern rather the L.H., which stems from the notation of bar 28, and we give the accents preserving the length difference. In FEcor one can see here a printed, yet deleted by Chopin,  mark. It may be a remnant of a possible  included in the handwritten base text. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 27

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

..

The sources prove Chopin's hesitation concerning the notation of the 3rd semiquaver on the 2nd and 3rd beats of the bar. It is best seen in Ap, in which the clear traces of corrections are visible in the 2nd group of the notes, and possible ones – in the 3rd one. In the case of the first of the corrections, a2, most probably, was changed to g2, however, in the photograph available to the editors of mUltimate Chopin, one cannot certainly determine the direction of the changes. The result of the possible second correction is obvious – g2.
In the remaining sources the difference concerns only the 7th note, which in CLI is written as g2 and in FE (→GE,EE) – as a2. The hesitation was probably a result of the natural returning a2 in the 3rd group of semiquavers (added in one of the later proofings).  

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in FE , Enharmonic corrections , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 37

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

Octave in CLI

Single note in Ap

Single note in FE (→GE,EE) 

Octave possibly intended in FE
..

In the main text we give the version of Ap and FE (→GE,EE), which could have been intended by Chopin, as he did not add A1 during numerous proofreadings of FE. In this version, the appearance of octaves in the bass is very consistent in the reprise: single notes in bars 36-40 and octaves from bar 41 to the end. However, it is very likely that the engraver of FE accidentally omitted the lower note of the octave, while Chopin did not notice it in proofings (the fact that the base text for FE could have included the octave is proved by CLI). There is no doubt that the octave, same as the remaining quavers in the L.H., would have been provided with a staccato dot.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 44

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

..

In CLI there are no naturals returning c2 and e2, nor the sharp raising g1 to g1. The second of these mistakes – lack of the  before e2 – remained unnoticed also in FEcor.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of CLI