mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Slurs
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Slurs

b. 42

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

No slur in A (→FE→GE,EE2)

Slur in EE3 (→EE4)
..

The slur added in EE3 (→EE4) is an arbitrary decision of the reviser, yet not devoid of intuition – cf. bar 2. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 47-49

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

Slur in A, contextual interpretation

Slurs in FE (→EE, →GE1→GE1a→GE2)

Slur in GE3 (→GE4→GE5)
..

A does not include slurs in bars 47-48, while the slur in bar 49 is unclear and blurred. The slurs adopted in the main text were added by Chopin in a proofreading of FE (→EE,GE1→GE2). In subsequent GE,s the slurs in bars 47-48 were overlooked, which is most probably a mistake.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 51-52

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

Slur in A

No slurs in FE (→GE,EE)

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

In bar 51, the sources do not have a slur over a group of four L.H. semiquavers. In the editors' opinion it is Chopin's oversight. In bar 52, only A has the slur comprising 6 semiquavers, which is probably due to the carelessness of the engraver of FE.

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

issues: Errors in FE