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. 36

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

A in AI

Octave in A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

The single A in AI is either the original version or only a simplified notation (in bar 32 AI has an octave).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 36

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

..

The cautionary  before A and a  before d2 are in AI, yet they were not included in A. Naturals before both notes of the octave were added in a proofreading of FE (→EE), most probably in the last phase, as they are absent in GE1. In subsequent GE, the signs were added together with cautionary sharps before d1-d2 in the R.H. The last addition is also present in EE4. 

The natural before a1 in the R.H. was added by us. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 36-37

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

..

In GE5 two out of six slurs embracing pairs of semiquavers in the L.H. were overlooked – the fourth and sixth.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 36

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

No fingering in AI & A (→FE→GE)

Fingering in EE
..

The fingering of first three pairs of semiquavers in EE were added by Fontana.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 36

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

No mark in AI & A

in FE (→GE,EE)

– possible interpretation of FE (→GE,EE)
..

The  indication appears in FE (→GE,EE) what urges to consider it a correction by Chopin. However, the comparison with the parallel passage in bars 30-33 rises doubts as to wether this sign was really intended – both four-bar sections have identical principal dynamic indications (, , cresc.) but there is no equivalent to the  sign in question. We can then suspect a misunderstanding of a  sign (quite frequent in FE – cf. bar 54) or even an outright mistake by the engraver overlooked by Chopin during proofreading. For these reasons we retain the A version in the main text, while regarding the vesion of the editions and its suggested interpretation as alternative readings.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE