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. 55

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

e1 in AI, A, FE2, GE1a (→GE2→GE3→GE4→GE5) & EE4

d1 in FE1 (→GE1,EE2→EE3)
..

d1 as the 4th semiquaver of the bottom voice in the R.H. is a patent error of FE1 (→GE1,EE2→EE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 55-57

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

Wedge in AI

Dots in A

Wedges in FE (→GE1→GE1a→GE2), GE5 & EE3 (→EE4)

No marks in EE2

Wedge in GE3 (→GE4)
..

In A it is not entirely clear with which staccato signs – dots or wedges – Chopin provided the A and E quavers in the middle of bars 44 and 57. In FE (→GE,EE) they were reproduced as wedges (in EE2 both signs were overlooked, while in GE3 and GE4 – the one in bar 57), yet, according to us, it is much more likely that Chopin had dots in mind. Cf. bars 58-60 where in similar motifs in A there are undoubtedly dots. In AI the signs are only in bars 57 (and 58) and they are undoubtedly wedges. However, it has to be emphasised that even the relatively accurate indications of AI, as e.g. in bar 43, were then changed by Chopin. See also bar 56. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Wedges

b. 55-56

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

No slur in the sources

Our variant suggestion
..

Lack of the slur in A (→FE→GE,EE) is probably a result of Chopin's distraction due to the transition to the new line – in the identical motif one bar before, the slur is present. However, Chopin could have differentiated between the indications of these motifs on purpose, which would be indicated by the use of a longer accent and wedge on B. 

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 56-57

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

Slurs in A

Slur in FE (→GE1→GE1a) & EE3

Slurs in GE2 (→GE3→GE4→GE5) & EE4
..

In bar 56 the earlier start of the slur in FE (→GE,EE; overlooked in EE2) seems to be an inaccuracy of the engraver, in spite of the fact that it is compatible with – according to us, apparently – lack of tie of f1. In turn, lack of the slur in bar 57 in FE (→GE1→GE1a→GE2→GE3) is almost certainly a mistake.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 56

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

..

In EE2 (→EE3) there is no accent on c1, which is certainly a mistake.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE