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

Verbal indications

b. 1

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

AI

A

FE1

FE2

GE1

GE1a (→GE2→GE3→GE4→GE5)

EE2 (→EE3)

EE4
..

In the main text we give the title and dedication in the undoubtedly authentic version adopted in FE. The extensions of both the title (in GE and EE) and dedication (in EE) most probably come from the editors. See the Etude in C major, No. 1, bar 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 1

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

in AI

in A

in FE (→GE,EE)
..

The change of Vivace to Lento was introduced by Chopin in a proofreading of FE (→GE,EE). The tempo indication of this Etude is the most flagrant example of the change of concept in Chopin's pieces, although a few arguments prove that the actual deceleration of the tempo could have not been that significant as it is suggested by the transition from Vivace to Lento ma non troppo. Cf. bar 21.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

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

b. 1

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

No marking in AI & A

in FE

in GE & EE
..

Chopin added the metronome indication at the time of proofreading FE. The value of crotchet in GE and EE is certainly erroneous – even with a quaver the tempo seems to be very fast and it has not been obeyed by the pianists for over one hundred years.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Metronome tempos

b. 1

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

legatiss. in A

legato in FE (→EE)

legato in GE
..

In the main text we give the legatiss. written in A (in AI this indication is absent). The change to legato in FE (→GE,EE) is probably a mistake. It is not clear whether the notation of A means that the indication is valid from the beginning of the piece or from the beginning of the two-part texture in the R.H. According to us, it is the second possibility that is more plausible.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 1-19

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

 in A

 in FE (→GE,EE)
..

In the main text we include the  indication at the beginning of the piece, in accordance with the way it was reproduced in FE (→GE,EE). In A Chopin most probably used a currently not used manner of placing the indications within their range of validity and not at the beginning. 

In AI there is no  indication at all. The absence of this and other performance indications is understandable only in the working notation of a piece and can be considered as an expression of Chopin's intention concerning this issue, as at this stage of the creative process the composer did not try to determine and write down all elements of his work. Due to this fact, in the notes concerning the performance indications, we do not consider their absence in AI as an equal version of a given fragment. Particularly when AI is not mentioned in the text of the note, it means that the discussed indication is absent in AI. 

category imprint: Differences between sources