mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

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

b. 29

composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

 in A

 in FE (→GE,EE)
..

The action of shortening the  hairpins in FE (→GE,EE) is certainly an arbitrary decision of the engraver.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 29

composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

No slur in AI & EE2

Slur in FE (→GE) & EE3 (→EE4), contextual interpretation of A
..

The ending of the slur in bar 29 in A is unclear – the slur at the end of the great stave suggests continuation, yet in the new great stave the slur in bar 30 clearly starts from the beginning of the bar. According to us, the interpretation adopted in FE (→GE,EE; in EE2 the slur was overlooked) is correct. 

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 30-35

composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

One voice in AI

Two voices in A (→FE→GE,EE)

Contemporary notation
..

The one-part notation in bars 30-31 and 34-35 in AI was replaced with two-part notation already at the stage of writing A (in the first half of bar 30 and 2nd half of bar 34 there are visible traces of removing some elements of the original script – the semiquaver beams and downwards stems of the upper part notes). Chopin used here an earlier notation, in which the extension to the next bar could be marked with a dot left at the beginning of that bar. In the main text we change this currently not used notation for the contemporary notation with the use of ties. Cf. the note concerning the R.H.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A

b. 30-35

composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

Plain quavers in AI

Dotted quavers in A (→FE→GE,EE)

Contemporary notation
..

The seemingly incomplete rhythmic notation in bars 30-31 and 34-35 in AI is, however, understandable in the context of regular semiquavers in the L.H. Chopin did not always pay attention to the precise notation of the complementary voices, hence we present this notation without additions. This notation was clarified by Chopin himself already in A. The composer used an earlier notation, in which the extension to the next bar could be marked with a dot left at the beginning of that bar. In the main text we change this currently not used notation for the contemporary notation with the use of ties. Cf. the note concerning the L.H. 

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

b. 30-31

composition: Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

Accents in A, contextual interpretation

Accents (diminuendos?) in FE

Long accents in GE1 (→GE1a→GE2)

Diminuendos (accents?) in EE

Short accents in GE3 (→GE4)

L.H. accents in GE5
..

In the main text we give the undoubtedly only authentic version of the accents on the d1-f1 and d1-f1 thirds in bars 30 and 31 respectively. The remaining versions are almost certainly a result of revisions or misinterpretation of the base texts by the engravers. Lack of signs in bar 31 in GE may prove that they were added in the last proofreading of FE. The last accent in A is clearly shorter, which, according to us, is an inaccuracy of Chopin's notation.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies