Issues : EE inaccuracies

b. 24-25

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

Slurs in FC (→GE1)

Slur in FE

Slur in EE

Slurs in GE2 (→GE3)

..

Different source slurring of these bars does not prove, according to us, various versions of phrasing, yet it only confirms difficulties with which one is faced at the time of interpreting slurs in Chopin autographs. In EE, the fact of embracing the entire discussed fragment with one slur, unconvincing from the piano and musical point of view, probably results from the panache, with which the slur was written in the manuscript (autograph or Gutmann's copy), which was supposed to start over the 2nd quaver in bar 25 – if its beginning falls already on the 1st quaver, the engraver could have assumed that it is about the link with the preceding D-G slur. In turn, in FC (→GE1), the division of the slur at the transition between bars 25-26 results from the probably too literal interpretation of broken slurs due to the change of clef and direction of beams (cf. the notation of FE, most probably yielding Chopin's intention better). Due to the above reasons, we consider the slurs introduced in GE2 (→GE3) to be correct. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , EE inaccuracies

b. 29-30

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

..

In FE and EE1 (→EE2) there are no flats lowering b2 to b2 in bar 29 and b1 to b1 in bar 30. In FC the inaccuracy appears only in bar 29. GE and EE3 include the correct text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

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. 47

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

Fingering in FC (→GE)

Fingering in FE

Fingering in EE

..

The smaller number of fingering digits in FC (→GE) means that Chopin completed the fingering in the base texts to FE and EE. In EE, omission of one of the digits written in FC indicates an oversight of the engraver or the person performing the base text to EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE inaccuracies

b. 58

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

..

Lack of the  returning d2 is a typical inaccuracy of Chopin notation. The sign was added only in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in FC