mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FE

b. 32

composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

c3 with  in A

c3 without  in FE1 (→GE,EE) 

c3 in FE2, modern notation
..

In the sources there are two versions of the inner note of the 5th quaver:

  •  c3, written in A with a cautionary , which, however, was omitted in FE1 (→GE,EE);
  • c3, which appears only in FE2 and accompanied by , a combination Chopin did not tend to use. Therefore, one can assume a misunderstanding at the time of implementation of a proofreading, which, to a certain extent, undermines the credibility of this version.

The second version is certainly later and as such it should be considered as the main one. In relation to the aforementioned doubts, in the main text we adopt the certainly authentic version with c3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED , Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 33-34

composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

 in A

Two  in FE

 in GE1

  twice in EE

  in GE2 (→GE3→GE4)

Our suggestion
..

According to us, A presents the only reliable pedalling version of these bars and the following sections of the Etude. The versions included in the editions are probably a result of an error of FE, the attempt of its later correction by Chopin in the last proofing and the subsequent arbitrary additions by the revisers of GE and EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , No pedal release mark , Inaccuracies in A

b. 33

composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

No marks in A

Dots in FE (→GE,EE) 

Our suggestion
..

In this context lack of staccato marks in A is Chopin's oversight, which is proved by dots added in FE (→GE,EE). According to us, while the proofreading undoubtedly confirms Chopin's intention to perform the quavers staccato, the kind of the used marks (dots) does not have to be considered as valid, as the engraver of FE was only occasionally able to recognise Chopin's wedges and Chopin himself, while proofreading FE, could adapt himself to the marks he saw already printed in the corrected text, i.e. dots. Due to this fact, in the main text we suggest varied marks, based on bar 1 and compliant with the marks which, on the basis of A, we adopted in the main text in the entire Etude.   

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 35

composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

No markings in A

Arpeggio signs in FE (→GE,EE) 
..

The missing arpeggios in the R.H. in A are certainly Chopin's oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Inaccuracies in A

b. 36

composition: Op. 10 No 11, Etude in E♭ major

No g in A

g in FE (→GE,EE)
..

The chord without g is probably the original version, left due to inaccuracy. It is proved by a number of other inaccuracies of A in this bar. In the main text we give the corrected by Chopin version of FE (→GE,EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE