mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

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

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 2-4

composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

No signs in A (→FE)

  in FC (→GE1)

  in EE

  in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The pair of   hairpins must have been added by Chopin in FC and base text to EE. Nothing indicates that Chopin could have wanted to resign from these indications – their absence in A (→FE) is almost certainly a result of haste and insufficient attention at the time of parallelly introducing corrections and additions in three Stichvorlage manuscripts. Similarly in bars 6-8.
Shortening the  sign in GE2 (→GE3) is most probably an editorial revision or a mistake of the engraver. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 6-8

composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

No signs in A (→FE)

  in FC & EE

  in GE
..

In the main text we give a pair of   hairpins added most probably by Chopin in FC and base text to EE. The shift of the  sign in GE was probably a result of division of the score into great staves – bar 7 falls at the end of the line.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 8

composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

 in A (→FE)

No sign in FC (→GE) & EE

Our variant suggestion
..

It is unclear why the  sign visible in A (→FE) was neither in FC (→GE) nor in EE. It could have been Fontana's oversight in FC and a similar inaccuracy in the base text to EE or in the very edition. It is also possible that Chopin added this sign in A already after having prepared the copy. According to us, crescendo, although not necessarily, is not contrary to the previous dynamic nuances, hence in the main text we leave its inclusion at the discretion of the performer.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 9-10

composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

No signs in A (→FE)

 in FC (→GE) & EE
..

In the main text we give  hairpins added most probably by Chopin in FC and base text to EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 9-10

composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

Staccato marks in A

Wedges in FC

Wedges in FE & EE

Wedges  in GE1

Wedges in GE2 (→GE3)

No marks – our suggestion
..

It is unclear whether taking the decision to indicate articulation of the R.H. with the help of verbal indications, Chopin wanted to resign from the previously written staccato signs. Beginning from bar 11, Chopin deleted them in A, so that the fact of leaving them in bars 9-10 proves, according to us, an unfinished correction due to distraction. Hence our suggestion of the main text. However, Chopin could have left double indications (with words and signs) at the beginning of the new section on purpose. Taking into account visible inaccuracies resulting from graphical difficulties, it is the notation of GE2 (→GE3) that is the version which expresses this intention best. The version of FE and EE can also pretend to be authentic (accepted by Chopin).

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

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Wedges , Inaccuracies in FC