Issues : Errors of GC

b. 7-8

composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor

  in AT

  in AW

No signs in GC (→GE)

  in CDP & FE

  in EE

..

The missing   in GC (→GE) is probably the copyist's oversight. Among marginal differences in the range of signs in particular sources, only the shorter hairpins of AW may suggest a slightly different shaping of the nuance. In the main text, we give the hairpins on the basis of FE (and CDP).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors of GC

b. 25

composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor

..

In GC (→GE1), FE and EE1 there is no  returning b1. This characteristic for Chopin error was corrected in later sources; AW and CDP also have the correct text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of GC

b. 56

composition: Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor

Natural (b1) in AW, CDP, EE2 (→EE3), FES & GE2 (→GE3)

No accidental (b1) in GC, FE & EE1

Flat (b1) in GE1

..

The notation of this bar is erroneous or inaccurate in the majority of the sources. Most probably, Chopin, writing this fragment in [A] for the third time (after analogous bars 6 and 25), had already such a strong correlation of the notes with the proper sound that he did not notice the missing  before the 4th quaver. Cancelling this alteration was, as usual, obvious, hence it was not marked even when the composer would correct the notation of this bar in FES (AW also does not include the ).

The cautionary  added before the 4th quaver in GE1 is certainly an editorial revision (most probably erroneous).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of A , Errors of GC