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. 54-57

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

..

In AI, there are no performance indications referring to the part of the R.H. in these bars – , legatissimo, sempre  (as well as slurs or accents, discussed separately). In EE2 there is no ; the mistake was corrected in EE3 (→EE4).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in EE

b. 54-57

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

..

In AI the layout of beams in the part of the R.H. does not reflect the structure of the motifs to such an extent as in A. The corrections in this scope visible in AI in bar 57 prove that the final concept crystalised at the time of writing this bar.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

b. 54

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

a2-d2-a3 in AI

d2-b2 in A (→FE→GE,EE)
..

The version of AI is certainly earlier and it cannot be excluded that it was left by inattention as the ending of the fragment that was ultimately deleted by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Changed phrase length

b. 54-55

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

..

In EE2 there is no slur in these bars; the error was corrected in EE3 (→EE4). Cf. bars 56-57.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE

b. 54

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

No mark in AI & FE (→GE,EE)

Accent in A
..

The missing accent in FE (→GE,EE) is almost certainly a mistake of the engraver.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE