mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

b. 64

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

A-B in AI, FE (→EE2→EE3) & GE5

G-A in GE1 (→GE2→GE3→GE4) & EE4
..

The corrections visible in AI show that G-A was the original version of the ending in all analogous bars (bars 13-14 and 63-64). According to us, it is therefore probable that in bar 64 in [A] Chopin wrote the original version by mistake, which was passed to the review copy of FE and then to GE1 (→GE2→GE3→GE4). The mistake was rectified in finished FE (→EE2→EE3), as well as in GE5. In turn, EE4 introduces – probably under the influence of GE3 – the erroneous version. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 68

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

g-h-f2 in AI, FE & EE3 (→EE4)

g1-b1-f2 in EE2

g1-b1-f2 in GE1

g1-b1-f2 in GE1a (→GE2)

g1-b1-g2 in GE3

g1-b1-g2 in GE4 (→GE5)
..

A sharp erroneously placed in GE1 before g1 was substituted in GE1a (→GE2) by  confirming b1 in this chord. It was probably an engraver's mistake while moving  before the middle note of the chord which seems natural in this context. The reviser of GE3 "corrected" this unnaturally sounding chord, by changing its topmost note, although in this case too, one cannot exclude the engraver's error. The erroneous accidental was not corrected until GE4 (→GE5). The missing  in EE2 is clearly an oversight, corrected in EE3 (→EE4). The only correct version is the concurrent text of AI and FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE , Errors resulting from corrections , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 69-70

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

No slur in AI & GE4 (→GE5)

Slur in FE (→GE1)

EE

GE2 (→GE3)

Our suggestion
..

The fact of beginning the slur from the 2nd group of semiquavers is almost certainly an inaccuracy of notation, which probably follows from [A]. Different versions of the slur's ending in EE and GE2 (→GE3) are certainly a result of the engravers' errors. The omission of the slur in GE4 (→GE5) may be considered as an oversight or revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

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

b. 72-74

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

..

We add cautionary sharps before d2 in bars 72 and 74. The signs were already added in GE, while the second of them also in EE4. In bar 74 FE (→GE1,EE) has an additional unjustified  before the 12th semiquaver (c3). This probably erroneous sign was removed in subsequent GE,s. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals

b. 79

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

No pedalling in AI

 in FE

GE1 (→GE2) & EE

GE3 (→GE4→GE5)
..

The  mark's placement in FE seems to be inaccurate, as depressing pedal already after the passage had started is unjustified from the point of view of the sound. Therefore, there must have been a misunderstanding in the interpretation of Chopin's notation. Both in GE1 (→GE2) and EE  was moved slightly to the left, under the quaver rest, which may be considered as an acceptable interpretation of this mark. However, most probably the pedal is to be depressed already at the beginning of the bar, as it was marked in GE3 (→GE4→GE5).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions