mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Pitch
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Pitch

b. 11

composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

..

We add a cautionary  before b2. The sign was already introduced in GE2 (→GE3→GE4→GE5) and EE4.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 12

composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

f-c1-f1 in AI

f-a-c1-f1 in FE (→GE,EE)
..

The absence of a in the chord in the L.H. on the 1st quaver is the original version, proved by AI. Similarly in analogous bar 62.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 14

composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

..

In AI there is no  lowering d1 to d1, which is a patent error.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omission of current key accidentals

b. 15

composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

B in AI

A in FE (→GE,EE)
..

The version of the editions is probably erroneous – cf. analogous bars 65-66, yet also similar figurations in bars 13-14 and 63-64 – hence in the main text we give the version of AI. The intended note in FE (→GE,EE) was probably an A and the error consisted in writing a single sharp (A) instead of the double one (A) before the note, which in the notation of FE comes down to the omission of the dots surrounding the  – cf. both signs at the beginning of bars 13-14.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 15

composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

c2 in AI, literal reading

b1 in FE (→GE,EE)
..

Interpretation of the pitch of the 2nd and 3rd crotchets in AI poses difficulties – the note heads are slightly bigger than usually, which suggests performed corrections, yet their result is not clear:

  • on the 2nd crotchet of the bar one can see c2 (more likely) or d2,
  • on the 3rd crotchet one can see c2, yet one also cannot exclude b1.

Taking into account the fact that first three crotchets of the text are written at an each time lower pitch and the phrase development in the published version seems to be so natural thanks to repetitions of the four-note motif, one can suppose that the seemingly different notation of AI is simply erroneous, while in the notation of the 3rd crotchet, two clear errors overlapped – lack of  and inaccurate position of the note head.

As the version of AI we adopt a stylistically acceptable text which imposes itself, while interpreting without detailed analyses and comparisons. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccurate note pitch in A