mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FE

b. 11

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

Wedge in A & EE

No marks in FC (→GE)

Two wedges in FE

Our variant suggestion
..

Adding the second wedge under this chord in FE seems to be an argument for an intention to leave this sign. On the other hand, Chopin did not add it in FC, as he probably did with the wedges in bar 16. Therefore, in the main text we leave the inclusion of this sign at the discretion of the performer.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 21

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

No slur in A & #EE

Slur in FC (→GE) & FE
..

The slur in FC was almost certainly added by Chopin, who added an analogous slur while proofreading FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 27

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

Quaver in A (→FC→GE)

Crotchet in FE & EE
..

The value of quaver for g2 is most probably the original version, inadvertently left in A (→FC→GE). It is indicated by the deleted slurs visible in A, grouping the chords in two in this bar. The value of crotchet was introduced probably in the base text to EE and in proofreading of FE. Cf. the adjacent note.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 31

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

..

The last dyad in the bottom voice seems to be a third in A, as the bottom note is written slightly too low. The visible in FE traces of correction prove that it actually misled the engraver and it must have been corrected in print.

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Inaccurate note pitch in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 46

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

No sign in A (→FC→GE) & EE

 in FE

Our variant suggestion
..

The  sign, added by Chopin in a proofreading of FE, proves that at the last stage of shaping of the Etude's notation, the composer decided to consolidate this way of interpretation – at least here, for the second time – in spite of the fact that earlier (cf. bar 8) he did not seem to be so adamant. In addition, it is justified by the combination of this crescendo with the preceding it pair of hairpins, suggested by us for the first time, in bar 8. On the other hand, the sound image of the entire section embracing bars 39-53 is clearly different in FE than in FC – the only three dynamic signs appear in FE in bars 44-46. Taking this into consideration, we assume that in the main text, generally based on FC, a possibility of omitting the discussed  in bar 46 should be left to the performers.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE