mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections in GC

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. 33-35

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

One slur in GC (→GE)

Three slurs in FE

Foru slurs in EE
..

The Chopin corrections visible in GC allow to state that the slurs of EE are the original version, left in the base text to this edition probably by inattention. In turn, the phrasing of FE, also being probably a result of Chopin corrections, may be considered as an alternative solution with respect to the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections in GC

b. 33

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

Rest in GC (→GE) & FE

Fourth in EE
..

The Chopin corrections visible in GC allow to state that the additional quaver of the accompaniment in EE is the original version, left in the base text to this edition most probably by inattention.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections in GC

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

b. 43-44

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

..

In GC one can see Chopin correction from the following original version: .

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Authentic corrections in GC