mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

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. 52

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

No slurs in AI & FE (→EE2)

Slur in A

Two slurs in GE & EE3 (→EE4)
..

In A Chopin overlooked one of the slurs in the L.H. (in AI there are no slurs in this fragment at all). The engraver of FE (→EE2) omitted the previous slur too. In the remaining editions these patent inaccuracies were corrected.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 55-57

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

..

In the editions the c and B quavers in bars 55-56 are not linked, yet provided with stems. Similarly to g at the end of bar 57 in GE. See also bars 54-57.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , FE revisions

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. 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. 58-60

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

No prolongations in AI

9 quavers in A

5 quavers in FE (→EE)

5 quavers in GE
..

In A, all g-f combinations in the bottom voice in the R.H. (also in bars 56-57) are precisely emphasised by their separation as combined pairs of quavers and accentuating the first note of each pair (g). This subtlety of notation was only partially reproduced in FE (→EE) – it is only the first and fourth quavers in the bar that were separated. As the accents are also respectively reduced, the whole may be considered to have been changed on purpose. However, not being certain thereof, in the main text we give the version of A.

In FE (→EE) last two separated notes have separate stems instead of a quaver beam. The notation of GE is similarly inaccurate, yet it is only f at the beginning of bar 58 that has a stem (overlooked in GE5). See the note to bars 44-57.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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