mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 3, Etude in E major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Omissions to cancel alteration

b. 38-40

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

..

The sources lack in some necessary cautionary accidentals – the fully correct text is only in GE4 (→GE5). If we take into consideration the logic of the figuration's structure, all these situations may be considered as obvious oversights, in spite of the fact that in a few cases the harmonic relations would allow to consider the created chords as possible. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 38

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

..

Before the top note on the 7th semiquaver, the  returning f is only in GE4 (→GE5). It means the sound of f in AI and in the aforementioned GE, and f in the remaining sources. However, there is no doubt that the missing  is Chopin's oversight, related to the correction on the 2nd semiquaver.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Errors of A

b. 41

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

..

AI lacks a few accidentals cancelling the previous alterations – on the 3rd semiquaver in the bar  a2, on the 7th semiquaver  G, on the 8th semiquaver  F. The regular structure of figurations causes that all these situations can be considered as obvious oversights.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration

b. 48-52

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

..

In the autographs there are no sharps returning f1 and f3 at the 6th semiquaver in bar 49. From the harmonic point of view, f1 and f3 could be possible here, yet taking into account the regularity of the figuration's structure, one can assume this omission as a clear oversight. The signs were added – probably by Chopin – in a proofreading of FE (→GE,EE; in GE1 and GE1a there is no  in the L.H.).

In bars 48-52, AI still lacks several accidentals, yet due to the octave doublings between the parts of both hands, it does not lead to any text doubts.
In GE1, before the top note of the 5th semiquaver in the R.H. in bar 49 there is an erroneous  instead of . The error was also in the proofreading copies of FE1, yet it was corrected in the last proofreading.
In FE1 (→GE1,EE2→EE3) there is no  lowering f3 to f3 in the 5th semiquaver in bar 51. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE