mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 2, Etude in F minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

b. 1

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

No title nor dedication in AT

Title in AW & CDP

Title & dedication in GC

Title & dedication in GE1
 
 

Title & dedication in EE1 & EE3
 
 
..

In the main text we give the title and dedication according to the title page of the entire opus in GC and FE.
See the Etude in A major, No. 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Dedications , GE revisions

b. 4

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

..

In AW, GC, FE and EE1 (→EE2), there is no  returning b2. This characteristic for Chopin mistake was corrected in the remaining sources. In the repetition of this phrase in bar 23 the error appears only in AW, in which the repetition is not written with notes.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions

b. 9

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

 
..

The last crotchet in GE1 is an e1. The reason of this patent error could have been the unnaturally high position of this note in GC. The mistake was corrected in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions

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