mUltimate Chopin

Issues : Errors in EE

b. 67-76

composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major

No fingering in CLI

Fingering in FE (→GE)

Fingering in EE

The fingering of FE (→GE) is certainly authentic. EE also includes it, yet in bar 74 the digit over the 5th semiquaver was omitted, probably inadvertently.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE

Show

in transcript in source compare sources

b. 69-70

composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major

No marks in CLI & EE2

in FE (→GE) & EE3 (→EE4)

Long accents (interpretation of the sources)

Five consecutive signs visible in FE (→GE) and EE3 (→EE4) can denote only long accents in this context. However, their significant size is not typical for Chopin long accents, yet they are to be found in autographs. It is very likely that the placement and size of the accents were distorted by the engraver, who, interpreting them as diminuendo, could subject them to a routine revision (cf., e.g., the Etude in A minor, No. 2, bars 8 and 12). In EE2 the signs were omitted, similarly as all other dynamic signs on this page.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Errors in EE

Show

in transcript in source compare sources

b. 71-78

composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major

No signs in CLI & EE2

in FE (→GE) & EE3 (→EE4)

Four pairs of dynamic hairpins in FE (→GE) and EE3 (→EE4) are undoubtedly authentic. However, the reason they are missing in EE2 is not entirely clear, yet it seems plausible to assume that the engraver of EE worked in parts covering particular kinds of signs and, perhaps influenced by the lack of dynamic hairpins on the previous pages of the Etude, he omitted this stage also on this page. See also bars 69-70 and 76.