mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Centrally placed marks

b. 2-4

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

Indications in A, literal reading

Indications in A, interpretation

FE (→GE,EE) 
..

The performance markings of A quite significantly differ from the ones included in FE (→GE,EE). Due to the fact that next to the omission of verbal indications in A the accents in the R.H. in bars 2 and 4 were added, we consider the printed version as proofread by Chopin and we adopt it in the main text. The  mark in bar 4 is, according to us, written in compliance with a sometimes applied by Chopin convention, according to which the indications are not arranged at the beginning of the area they consider, e.g., a motif, yet closer to its middle.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 5

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

in A, contextual interpretation

No indication in FE (→GE,EE) 

Our variant suggestion
..

Not being certain whether the lack of sempre legato in FE (→GE,EE) is accidental, we give the indication in brackets. In bars 45-46 the analogous passage is embraced with slurs in all sources, which indirectly confirms the legato articulation also in this case. In spite of the fact that the indication in A begins only in the 2nd group of semiquavers, its binding force from the beginning of the passage is undeniable.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Centrally placed marks

b. 10-12

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

 in A

FE (→GE,EE) 
..

In A  marks in bars 10 and 12 are written only on the 4th beat in the bar, on  marks. According to us, the way of their arrangement is a result of the already disappearing in Chopin's times convention of writing marks inside their scope of validity (and not at the beginning). This is how it was understood in FE (→GE,EE), in which the indications were moved before the octave motifs. This phenomenon also appears in bars 50-53 and 60-63, to an even greater extent.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 51-63

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

 &  in A

FE (→GE,EE) 

Our suggestion
..

In A the dynamic marks –  and particularly  – in bars 51-53, 60 and 62-63 are written only on the 4th beat of the bar, sometimes on  marks. According to us, it is an example of use of an earlier notation convention by Chopin – see bars 10-12. In FE (→GE,EE) only one of the indications was reproduced in accordance with A (bar 52), some of them were overlooked (in separately discussed bars 61-62) and the remaining ones were arranged in such way so they concern entire octave motifs pursuant to the currently binding notation rules. Cf. the remarks concerning  marks in bars 51-63.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Centrally placed marks

b. 83

composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor

 in A

No indication in FE (→GE,EE) 

 written into FED

() suggested by the editors
..

It is uncertain why  written in A was not included in FE (→GE,EE). Lack of the traces of a possible deletion of the mark allows to assume its omission by the engraver, e.g., in relation to lack of space between the staves. Due to this fact, in the main text we suggest a variant solution. At the same time, we move the indication to the beginning of the bar, as the way it is written in A suggests that it concerns the entire chordal ending of the Etude. This conclusion, as well as the very need for a dynamic indication in this place, is confirmed by Chopin's entry in FED. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Centrally placed marks