Issues : Errors in FE
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In the main text we give the title as adopted in FE and confirmed in the engraver's copy of several Etudes (No. 5-8 and 12). The title included in CLI, although earlier, is also authentic – Chopin himself described in this way one of his etudes in a letter to a friend – and reflects Chopin's pragmatic approach to the issue of the pieces' names (cf. the original title of Berceuse Op. 57, "Variants"). Therefore, it is hard to assume that the extended titles of GE and EE were something more than a marketing ploy of the publishers, which, after all, were gladly used also in case of other genres, e.g., in waltzes, in which the authentic titles were extended with different adjectives: 'grande' in Op. 18, 24, 42, 'brillante' in Op. 34, 'nouvelle' in Op. 42 (see also Etudes Op. 25). We also give this dedication in the version of FE (→GE). Its extension in EE seems to be rather an idea of the publisher who, however, could have agreed it with Chopin. Apart from FE1 (→EE2→EE3), the erroneous initial of Liszt's name (J) also appears in some copies of FE2 and GE1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Dedications , GE revisions , Various titles |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 7-12
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In FE there are no ties sustaining the upper notes of the octaves in bars 7-8, 9-10 and 11-12. According to us, the most probable explanation is a kind of misunderstanding at the time of changing the original brief notation of the octaves with the use of 8 under the upper notes for regular notation. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Abbreviated octaves' notation |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 12-14
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
In FE there are no ties sustaining the upper notes of the octaves in bars 11-12 and 13-14. According to us, the most probable explanation is a misunderstanding at the time of changing the original brief notation of the octaves with the use of 8 under the upper notes for regular notation. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 22
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
CLI has b2 as the 4th semiquaver in the R.H., which results from the logic of the figuration's structure. In FE1 there is a d3, put here by mistake and corrected by Chopin in a proofreading of FE2 (→EE) for b2. The erroneous note must have initially been present also in GE1, which is confirmed by visible traces of its deletion, however, eventually GE1 and all subsequent editions of GE also feature b2.
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 38
|
composition: Op. 10 No 1, Etude in C major
..
G in GE is a mistake (it was corrected only in GE5) drawn from the review copy of FE, which is proved by the visible traces of the note's deletion in FE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
