mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 7, Etude in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in FE

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

b. 1

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

Quavers in GC (→GE) & EE

Crotchets in FE
..

In the main text we suggest quavers, as their authenticity is beyond any doubt. In turn, the crotchets in FE may be a result of the engraver's inattention – the spaces between the c-B and B-a notes correspond to the previous space c-c (quaver) and not G-d (crotchet), which probably means that the engraver planned the notes, seeing quavers in the base text, however, then he omitted this place while adding the beams. On the other hand, one cannot completely exclude Chopin's proofreading in FE – he may have accepted crotchets during the lessons, as an appropriate correction was not written in any of the three pupil's copies (two of them – FED and FES – bear clear traces of a detailed development of the Etude with Chopin, while in FES the first added fingering concerns exactly these two notes). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 15

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

..

In GC and FE there is no  lowering c to c. This patent inaccuracy was corrected in GE and EE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of GC

b. 23

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

 in GC (→GE) & EE3

 in FE

No sign in EE1 (→EE2)
..

In the main text we give the unambiguous  hairpins written in GC (→GE). The  sign in FE may be a result of a frequently encountered print error consisting in inserting the mirror-image of the intended sign (cf., e.g., the Etude in C minor, Op. 10 No. 12, bar 53). The absence of the sign in EE1 (→EE2) is most probably a result of inattention, while its addition in EE3 – a revision based on GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Sign reversal

b. 24

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

..

In FE there are no accidentals before the 7th and 8th demisemiquavers. This frequent inaccuracy in Chopin notation was most probably repeated after the manuscript. Chopin partially corrected his mistake in GC and FED, adding a  raising g to g. EE and GE include the correct notation.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in GC

b. 27

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

..

In FE there is no  lowering g2 to g2 on the 1st chord of the bar, which is a patent error. The sign is in all remaining sources. All sources, together with FE, include a  at this pitch before the chord on the 2nd beat of the bar. In the main text, we omit this unnecessary sign in this context.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE