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. 61

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

No indication in AI, A & GE1 (→GE1a→GE2)

in FE (→EE)

in GE3 (→GE4→GE5)
..

The indication poco rall. was added by Chopin most probably in the last proofreading of FE (→EE). It is indicated by its absence in GE1 (→GE1a→GE2). The subsequent GE add in this place only rall., probably to justify a tempo in bar 62.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: GE revisions

b. 61

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

No marking in AI & A (→FE→GE,EE)

written into FED

Our variant suggestion
..

The indication  was added by Chopin in FED, in which there are no dynamic indications both in this () and in the next bar (). Therefore, it is possible that the addition was meant to change the dynamic concept of the return of the main theme of the Etude, written in A and given in the main text. However, it is not the only possibility – the indication may also be considered as clarification of the local dynamic level of the 2nd half of bar 61, not determining the way of performance of bar 62 and subsequent ones. Due to this fact, we suggest a possibility of including  independently from the remaining indications.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED

b. 61

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

No mark in AI & FE (→GE,EE)

Long accent in A

Our variant suggestion
..

It is hard to determine whether the missing accent in FE (→GE,EE), probably resulting from the engraver's inaccuracy, was not eventually accepted by Chopin – cf. bars 61 and 62.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 62

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

No indications in AI & FE (→GE,EE)

in A

Our variant suggestion
..

According to us, the fact of leaving out  and legatiss. is a result of inattention of the engraver of FE (→GE,EE). The entry in a pupils' copy in bar 61 may however suggest that in the later period, Chopin not only accepted the absence of these indications, but even slightly modified the original dynamic concept of the return of the main theme.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 62-72

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

..

In AI the bars are marked as repetition of the respective fragment from the beginning of the Etude. The indication included between bars 61 and 73 – Da capo al segno Mechetti pedal sign  e poi – interpreted literally, requires repetition of almost the entire 1st part of the piece, including bars 1-19. It means that Chopin either decided to shorten the repetition of the theme only while writing A or did not take enough care of a precise indication of the range of repetition, obvious to him, in the draft AI, written hastily. In mUltimate Chopin we adopt – partly due to practical reasons – the second assumption. Taking into account the fact that bars 9-13 are written more precisely in AI than bars 1-5, we assume that the repetition includes the concise section in bars 9-19 (certainly without g1 at the beginning).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Source & stylistic information

issues: Abbreviated notation of A