mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FC

b. 1

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

 in A (→FE) & GE2 (→GE3)

 in #CF

 in GE1 & EE
..

According to us, placing  in A only at the beginning of bar 1 is an example of Chopin's using a manner of putting the indications inside, and not at the beginning of, the area of their validity, which is not used at all today. It is also possible that Chopin feared the suggestion that the indication refers only to the L.H., yet this risk also seems to be negligible in our times. In FC Fontana put the sign slightly earlier, so that in GE1 it was printed at the very beginning of the piece. The interpretation was reviewed in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC , Centrally placed marks

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

b. 9-10

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

Different accents in A

Short accents in FC (→GE), FE & EE

Long accents alternatively suggested by the editors
..

It is not entirely clear which type of accents Chopin had in mind in these bars (similarly in bars 39-40). The second of them is undoubtedly a long accent, yet the first one, in spite of a seemingly analogous situation, can hardly be considered to be such an accent. As the notation of accents in the Etudes is not very precise, we consider it to be acceptable to see both signs as long accents.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 14-15

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

 in A (→FE)

 in FC (→GE)

 in EE
..

The moment of beginning  hairpins falls in another place in each of three sources certainly (A) or possibly (FC and EE) representing the signs written by Chopin. At the same time, while the sign in EE may be considered to be compatible with A, crescendo in FC (→GE) clearly defines another dynamic nuance. In the main text we follow A (→FE), in which the range of the sign corresponds to the hairpins in analogous bars 6-7.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FC

b. 39

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

Slurs in A (→FE) & EE

Slurs in FC (→GE)
..

It is hard to state how the difference in the slurring between FC (→GE) and A and the remaining sources was created. The copyist's error seems to be the most probable answer, yet it cannot be totally excluded that the slur, beginning in this bar and overlooked by the copyist, was added by Chopin. Independently from the way it was created, the version of FC did not raise Chopin's doubts when he was adding dynamic hairpins in this and further bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FC