EE3 - Corrected impression of EE2
Main text
AI - Working autograph
A - Autograph
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Corrected impression of FE1
FED - Dubois copy
FEJ - Jędrzejewicz copy
FES - Stirling copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE1a - Corrected impression of GE1
GE2 - Second German edition
GE3 - Third German edition
GE4 - Fourth German edition
GE5 - Fifth German edition
EE - English edition
EE2 - First English edition
EE3 - Corrected impression of EE2
EE4 - Revised impression of EE3
compare
  b. 65-66

Tie to f1 in AI, GE1a (→GE2GE3GE4GE5) & EE3 (→EE4)

No tie in A (→FEGE1,EE2)

Our variant suggestion

In A (→FEGE1,EE2) lack of the tie sustaining f1 may be Chopin's oversight. In AI the bars are marked as repetition of bars 4-5 (or 12-13), in which f1 is sustained. In A the repetition of the initial fragment of the Etude is written with visibly less concentration; moreover, the proofreading of FE was also less accurate in this fragment (cf. e.g. bars 67 and 69).
On the other hand, the version of bar 67 written in A constitutes a repetition of the figure in bar 66 one fourth higher, which is even more audible when f1 at the beginning of this bar is repeated. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that Chopin omitted the tie of this note on purpose. However, while proofreading FE, in bar 67 the composer eventually resigned from the strict repetition of the previous bar, hence it cannot be excluded that also in the case of sustaining the discussed note, he could have wanted to return to the original concept, although he did not mark it in the proofreading. Taking into account the aforementioned possibilities, in the main text we leave the inclusion of the slur at the discretion of the performer. 

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions, GE revisions, Errors of A

notation: Rhythm

Go to the music

.