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. 54

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

Long accent in AI & EE3 (→EE4)

Short accent in A (→FE→GE)

 in EE2
..

The long accent in AI (in this and in the next bar) proves that highlighting the c note was an important element of the sound concept of this fragment from the very beginning. However, the clearly short sign in A (→FE→GE) opens the issue of the type of accent, with which Chopin wanted to provide this note. According to us, it is the notation of the fair score that is inaccurate in this case, however, as we are not certain, in the main text we reproduce the notation of the main source.
The sign used in EE is closer to a long accent or even diminuendo hairpins, while in EE2 it was printed the other way round, as . In the copy presented in mUltimate Chopin, the mistake was corrected by hand (the other, uncorrected copy can be seen here). 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Errors in EE , EE inaccuracies , Sign reversal

b. 54

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

No marks in AI & FE (→GE,EE)

Wedges in A
..

Lack of the wedges in the editions is most probably a mistake.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Wedges

b. 55

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

Probable long accents in A

Possible short accents in A (→FE→GE) & EE3 (→EE4)
..

Both accents – on f1 in the R.H. and on c in the L.H. – seem to be longer in A than their counterparts in the previous bar (as well as the majority of other accents in bars 54-59). The difference was not reproduced in the editions, it is also unclear whether Chopin actually wanted to differentiate the accents. In the main text, we give the long accents, taking into account also the undoubtedly long accent in the L.H. in AI. Cf. bar 54 and 55-56.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

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. 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