Issues : Errors of FC

b. 5

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

..

In FE (→GE1) the last two semiquavers in these bars were erroneously copied from the next group (the 3rd and 4th semiquaver in bar 6). The mistake was corrected in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Errors of FC

b. 5

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

..

The sources differ in notation of the accidentals on the 1st and 4th semiquavers of the last group. Due to the regularity of the figurations, it can be assumed that Chopin was thinking about b2-d3 and d3-f3. When the group is written without the octave sign, the text does not require any signs and this is the notation we see in FE. In the remaining sources, an octave sign was used (same as in the main text), which leads to the need of making the notation more precise:

  • In FC (→GE1) the last third is written at an erroneous pitch, hence the problem concerns only the 1st third, which is not preceded by any sign.
  • In EE1 there are also no signs before the 1st third, in turn, there are sharps before both notes of the last third. It is undoubtedly a mistake, as the  next to d3 makes sense only before the 1st third. In EE2 (→EE3) the  concerning dwas not moved, yet a  was added before b2.
  • GE2 (→GE3) includes the notation compatible with the contemporary standards, adopted also in the main text.

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

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Errors of FC

b. 7-8

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

No accidentals in FC (→GE1), FE & EE

Naturals in GE2 (→GE3)

Naturals suggested by the editors

..

In front of the 2nd semiquaver in each of these bars, there are no accidentals in the sources except for naturals added in GE2 (→GE3), which cannot come from Chopin. Therefore, it seems that the top note is supposed to be a2. However, there are strong grounds, both source (proved also in other pieces Chopin's doubts concerning the notation of a/a notes in the G minor key) and stylistic (natural harmonic passage), for considering it as Chopin's mistake. Therefore, in the main text we suggest to add naturals to achieve the sound of a2.

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

issues: Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Last key signature sign , Errors of FC

b. 12

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

F-G-F in FE & EE, contextual interpretation of FC

A-G-F in GE1

A-G-F in GE2 (→GE3)

..

The third quaver in FC is incomplete and, hence, illegible. One can see there traces of an unfinished correction – the note head of the A note was deleted, most probably together with the  placed in front of it (which gives A), however, there is no note written instead of the deleted one. GE1 decided to print in this place A; in this version the 5th quaver, devoid of the accidental, is an F. In turn, the reviser of GE2 (→GE3) added a  in front of it, raising it to F. None of these versions can be authentic, which is confirmed by the compatible text of FE and EE with F on the third, and as a consequence, 5th quaver. According to us, it is most probably this version that was the only one written by Chopin and if it had not been for the so-called Terzverschreibung error committed by the copyist, it would have been included also in FC.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Errors of FC

b. 12

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

..

The sharp returning c2 appears in [A] (→FCGE1) and EE1 only before the 9th semiquaver, which is undoubtedly a mistake committed by Chopin (the composer, same as in many other places, concentrated on marking the top voice only). In the remaining sources, the sign was moved to the correct place (FE and GE2 and GE3) or was only added in this place (EE2 and EE3).  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors of FC