mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

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

Rhythm

b. 12

composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Demisemiquaver in GC (→GE)

Semiquaver in FE & EE
..

It is unclear how the difference in the rhythm in this place was created, however, none of these two versions seems to be erroneous. The notation of EE indicates a possibility of the engraver's error – the b1 semiquaver is placed closer to the bar line than the g semiquaver, therefore, it is possible that in the base text to EE the rhythm was the same as in GC. It also cannot be excluded that the additional dot and beam were added in GC by Chopin, although the graphical image of the notation rather does not confirm it. Due to the above ambiguities, in the main text we give the double dotted rhythm, present in the base source (GC).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections in GC , Dotted or even rhythm

b. 30

composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

No d2 in GC (→GE) & EE

d2 in FE

d2 in simplified rhythmic notation
..

The version of FE with an additional, sustained d2 (as in analogous bar 34) is probably a result of Chopin's proofreading – a fragment of the stem reaching this note is slightly tilted, which indicates its later addition. When using the authentic pedalling, it has only an ideational meaning. We take this version as the basis of the main text, in which we, however, modify the way of notation after the one Chopin used in bar 35.

The notation of the sources is a result of changes in the rhythmic structure of the accompanying part, introduced by Chopin (similarly in bars 32 and 34). Originally – which can be clearly seen in GC – the quaver dyads and chords were always struck, independently from the top voice. Chopin deleted some of the notes then, while he sustained other ones with ties. The process was ended only with proofreading of FE – in this bar (described above) and in bar 32. Generally, Chopin – whenever it was possible – would avoid the notation with ties, trying to write the struck notes only (cf. bar 35, as well as, e.g., the Etude in A minor, No. 4 from bar 9 or the Etude in E major, Op. 10 No. 3, bars 30-31 and 34-35). Due to these reasons, in the main text we suggest the notation with crotchets, modelled after the Chopin one in bar 35.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 32

composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Even quavers, no ties in GC (→GE)

Even quavers, ties in EE

Dotted rhythm, ties in FE

FE in simplified rhythmic notation
..

Same as in bar 30, the version of FE, being a result of Chopin proofreading (introducing the dotted rhythm in the top voice and sustaining b1 already from the 5th quaver of the bar), is given by us in the main text in a modified form. The simplified rhythmic notation, in accordance with Chopin's habits concerning this issue, according to us, significantly increases the text's legibility.

The missing ties sustaining the e1-g1 third in GC (→GE) are almost certainly the copyist's oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE , Main-line changes , Errors of GC , Dotted or even rhythm

b. 34

composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Notation with tied quavers in GC (→GE), FE & EE

Crotchet suggested by the editors
..

Due to the changes, to which the accompanying part of the R.H. was subject – added ties by Chopin – in the main text we suggest an equal, simpler notation.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 35

composition: Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Arpeggio sign in GC (→GE) & EE

No arpeggio sign in FE

Ties in FES
..

The arpeggio in GC was added most probably by Chopin (cf. the arpeggios written with the hand of a copyist in the Etude in A minor, No. 11, bar 53-54). Therefore, lack of the sign in FE is probably a result of the composer's inattention. The sustention of the chord marked in FES, compatible with Chopin's tendency to eliminate the strokes of the accompanying part together with the sounds of the top voice (cf. the note to bar 30), may be considered as an equal variant.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Authentic corrections in GC