Issues : EE inaccuracies

b. 30-31

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

Accents in A, contextual interpretation

Accents (diminuendos?) in FE

Long accents in GE1 (→GE1aGE2)

Diminuendos (accents?) in EE

Short accents in GE3 (→GE4)

L.H. accents in GE5

..

In the main text we give the undoubtedly only authentic version of the accents on the d1-f1 and d1-f1 thirds in bars 30 and 31 respectively. The remaining versions are almost certainly a result of revisions or misinterpretation of the base texts by the engravers. Lack of signs in bar 31 in GE may prove that they were added in the last proofreading of FE. The last accent in A is clearly shorter, which, according to us, is an inaccuracy of Chopin's notation.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 54

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

Long accent in AI & EE3 (→EE4)

Short accent in A (→FEGE)

 in EE2

..

The long accent in AI (in this and in the next bar) proves that highlighting the note was an important element of the sound concept of this fragment from the very beginning. However, the clearly short sign in A (→FEGE) 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. 57

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

Long accent in A

Accent (?) in FE (→GE1)

Short accent on d1 in EE2 (→EE3)

Short accent on g1 in GE2 (→GE3GE4GE5) & EE4

..

One can have doubts concerning the type of the accent used in A to indicate the beginning of the motif. According to us, it is the long accent that is more likely. In FE (→GE1) the sign was reproduced inaccurately, so that in EE2 (→EE3) it was placed over the 2nd semiquaver in the bar.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies