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
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 30

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

 
&  in Ap

Accent in FE (→GE,EE) 
..

In the main text we give the accent written by Chopin in FEcor. The sign was correctly recreated in FE (→GE), whereas in EE2 it was misplaced on the 4th beat of the bar, which was then revised in EE3 (→EE4), so the accents are present in both places.
Ap has meticulously marked   waves in this place, as well as  in the L.H. We do not give these indications in the main text due to the different level of details of the indications of the version for printing prepared by Chopin. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 31

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

  &  in Ap

Accents in FEcor

 in FE (→GE,EE) 
..

In the main text we give long accents written by Chopin in FEcor. Both signs were clearly distorted in finished FE (→GE,EE).
Ap has – as in the previous bar – meticulously marked   waves and  in the L.H. in this place. We do not consider these indications in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 32

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

No mark in CLI & FE (→GE,EE) 

Wedge in Ap

Wedge in Ap
..

The wedge written in Ap is most probably a part of Chopin's quest for an accurate way of writing down this chord – cf. the adjacent remark. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Wedges

b. 32

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

Accents in Ap, literal reading

Accents in Ap, probable interpretation

Accents in Ap, possible interpretation

 in FEcor

 in FE (→GE)

 in EE
..

Three accents written in Ap in bar 32 are undoubtedly short, if considering their shape. However, their position gives raise to doubts – the signs certainly do not exclusively refer to the upper voice, therefore, they fall on the 2nd, 3rd and 4th beat of the bar, where they probably concern the entire chords. However, if they concern the chords, such a position suggests their extended function, which corresponds to the definition of long accents (cf. bars 45-46). In the main text we give one  written by Chopin – as in two following bars – in FEcor. In finished FE (→GE) and EE the sign was reproduced inaccurately. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 33-34

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

No signs in CLI & EE2

 in Ap

 in FEcor

 in FE

 in GE1 (→GE2)

 in GE3 (→GE4→GE5)

 in EE3 (→EE4)
..

The sources differ in the range of  entries. Chopin's entries in Ap and FEcor do not show significant differences, in the main text we give the version of FEcor. In finished FE the hairpins in bar 33 were shortened, the version was reproduced in EE with insignificant displacements (except for EE2, where both signs were omitted). It is GE that displays the greatest differences in comparison with the base text: the hairpins in bar 33 actually correspond to authentic signs, yet the sign in bar 34 in GE1 (→GE2) was arbitrarily prolonged, which distorted its meaning, whereas in GE3 and subsequent ones – it was totally omitted.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions