Op. 25 No 6, Etude in G♯ minor

  b. 30-31

		Semiquaver d2 & tied b1 in FC & GE2
		Quaver d2 & repeated b1 in FE
		Quaver d2 & tied b1 in GE1
		Semiquaver d2, rest & tied b1 in EE & GE3
		Our alternative variant suggestion

Certain sources differ in the rhythmic notation of the last third. It concerns three elements:

• Authenticity of the semiquaver value for the d² note written in FC and EE is undeniable. The very writing of this third with division into voices suggests a different character of each of the components, e.g., through the difference of the rhythmic value. On the other hand, the quaver in FE may be a result of Chopin correction, introduced still in the base text or during correction of print. An important argument for such a scenario is constituted by the staccato dot added over this quaver – if the engraver had changed the semiquaver to quaver in order to correct the alleged rhythmic error, he would not have any reason for adding this dot (this is what the reviser of GE1 did).
• The rest completing the rhythmic values of the top voice could have been added by the reviser of EE, yet it could have also been erroneously omitted by Fontana in FC.
• Same as in the case of the d² semiquaver, there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the tie of b¹, present in FC (→GE) and EE. Its absence in FE may be a simple oversight, yet it can be also explained with Chopin's later correction. The high likeliness of the latter is indicated by three other additions made to the text in this place – staccato dot and  and pedalling at the beginning of bar 31.

On the basis of the above analysis, we draw the following conclusions, providing basis for editing the main text:

• for the top note we adopt the notation of FE, which may be a result of Chopin's proofreading. All three versions pretending to be authentic – FC, FE and EE – are almost equal when it comes to the sound effect;
• as far as the issue of sustaining or repeating the b¹ note, which is far more important, we also decided for the version of FE, most probably accepted, perhaps even introduced by Chopin at the time of proofreading this edition. However, due to the lack of total certainty when it comes to the final intention of the composer, we suggest an alternative variant solution with the tie in brackets.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions, GE revisions, Authentic corrections of FE, Inaccuracies in FC

notation: Rhythm

Go to the music