mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Annotations in FES

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. 39

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

..

In GC, FE and EE1 (→EE2) there is no  lowering c1 to c1, whereas in FE there is also no sign before c in the L.H. The necessary signs were added in FES, GE and EE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Annotations in FES

b. 48-49

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

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

The fingering repeating and completing Chopin indications from bars 4-5 written with the pupil's hand.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 52-53

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

No grace note in GC (→GE), FE & EE

Grace note in FES
..

In FES, in the middle part of the chromatic run, there is a zigzag, which may indicate a deletion of a part or entire run, while at the beginning of bar 53 there is an added e grace note (same as in bar 1). One can suppose that it is about a kind of simplification of the virtuoso passage (same as in bars 22 and 24), yet in this case the text, with which it is supposed to be replaced, was not written, nor marked in a legible way. Perhaps Chopin meant to repeat the relevant fragment in bar 8, then the grace note in bar 53 would have certainly been written with a mistake (e instead of c). In face of such an unclear situation, we give the printed text as the version of FES, completed with the literally interpreted grace note. In the main text, we do not consider these entries in any form.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Terzverschreibung error , Annotations in FES

b. 58

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

No mark in GC (→GE), FE & EE

Accent in FES

Our suggestion
..

In the main text we give the long accent, written in FES, in brackets as authentic and unobvious interpretation suggestion.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES