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
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 43-46

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

Dots & slur in AI

18 wedges in A

2 wedges in FE (→GE1)

No marks in EE2

2 dots in EE3 (→EE4)

4 wedges in GE1a (→GE2→GE3→GE4)

2 wedges in GE5

Our variant suggestion
..

All wedges given in the main text are in A. In FE (→GE1) only two signs at the beginning of bar 44 were reproduced. In EE2 even those were omitted, which was corrected in EE3 (→EE4), by adding two staccato dots in this place (there was also an arbitrarily added slur for the L.H. in bars 43 and 45). In the subsequent GE, wedges in bar 46 were added, while in GE5 those in bar 44 were omitted. According to us, Chopin could have accepted the lack of wedges over the chords in bars 43 and 45 (not to mention a possibility of their deletion in proofreading, which also cannot be entirely excluded), therefore, in the main text we leave their inclusion at the discretion of the performer. In turn, in the main text we explicitly give the wedges at the beginning of bars 44 and 46, which, as it seems, are to be considered jointly (cf. the signs in bars 42, 48 and 50). The indications of AI, despite being written only in the first pair of bars, indicate essential performance elements of these chord passages. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 43

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

 in AI & A

FE (→GE,EE)
..

In the main text we suggest an average interpretation of the range of the  hairpins in AI and A. The minor difference between the autographs is almost certainly insignificant and it results from the graphic nature. It is particularly the slightly earlier beginning of the sign in A that is a result of bypassing the previously written indication con forza. In FE (→GE,EE) the sign – which clearly starts from the beginning of the bar – was radically shortened in order to avoid a clash with this indication – cf. bars 38-40.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 45

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

 in AI

 in A

No sign in FE (→GE,EE)

Our variant suggestion
..

Lack of the  sign in FE (→GE,EE) seems to be one of numerous mistakes of the engraver of FE of this type. However, possibilities of a proofreading intervention of Chopin cannot be totally excluded here – cf. the adjacent note.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 48-50

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

No marks in AI & FE (→GE,EE)

Wedges in A
..

In the main text we give the wedges written in A. Their absence in FE (→GE,EE) is almost certainly a result of the engraver's negligence. The signs prove that Chopin wanted to preserve the pulsation compatible with the regular metric and rhythmic flow. It is also the different direction of the beams in the pairs of semiquavers at the transitions between bars 47-48 and 49-50 that underline the special meaning of these figures (in A Chopin deleted the already correct beams only to change their direction).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

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