mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 6, Etude in G♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

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

b. 47-48

composition: Op. 25 No 6, Etude in G♯ minor

..

The notation of accidentals in the sources shows significant inaccuracies and differences, which, however, do not cause any difficulties in interpreting Chopin's intentions. Due to the use of an octave sign in some of the sources, it is also unclear which signs have to be considered as necessary.
The most serious mistake is included in EE1, in which in bar 47 there is not a single  lowering a to a. FC (→GE1) and FE include a  giving an a3 before the 1st semiquaver; the sign was added only in EE2 (→EE3) together with a respective  in the L.H. In bar 48 in FC, FE and EE1, the  giving a1 appears only before the 3rd semiquaver; the necessary sign at the beginning of the bar was added in GE1 and EE2 (→EE3), yet only in EE2 (→EE3) the superfluous in this situation sign before the 3rd third was deleted. It is only GE2 (→GE3) that includes the completely correct notation.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC

b. 48

composition: Op. 25 No 6, Etude in G♯ minor

..

EE1 (→EE2) has a cautionary  only before d. The sign before the D minim – present in all the remaining sources – was added in EE3. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 59

composition: Op. 25 No 6, Etude in G♯ minor

e1 in FC (→GE)

e1 in FE & EE
..

Before the bottom note of the 4th third in FE and EE there is no  raising e1 to e1. It indicates a possible Chopin's mistake in [A] (or an inaccuracy of notation). The sharp written in FC is perhaps an independent, yet undoubtedly correct addition of Fontana. Moreover, in EE there is no  returning e1 in the next third, which can be an editorial revision, as the editor, believing that the previous note is correct, considered this sign to be superfluous.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE