mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in EE

b. 9-13

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

..

In GC (→GE1), FE and EE there are no naturals raising c to c in bars 9 and 13 and c1 to c1 in bar 12. These are Chopin's obvious oversights, while the signs were added in FED (in bar 9) and FEJ and FES (all).
GE1 also omitted the  raising c1 to c1 in bar 10. GE2 (→GE3) features the correct text. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 34

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

No accidentals in sources (literal reading—C-c)

Contextual interpretation suggested by the editors (C-c)
..

Lack of the naturals raising C-c to C-c is almost certainly Chopin's mistake, despite the fact that this kind of oversights of signs introducing alterations are not frequent (yet they are to be found in, e.g., the Etude in F minor, No. 2, bar 56). It could have seemed that the C-c octave did not require naturals due to the following reasons:

  • on a number of occasions, Chopin was not sure whether the last or the following it key signature is valid or not, particularly when their number was significant (cf., e.g., the Etude in G minor, No. 6, t. 7-8).
  • the chromatic progressions are characteristic for the melodic structure of a number of fragments of the Etude, e.g., in bars 1-3, 10, 23-24 (in the latter they are also in the harmonic structure). The last such fragment are bars 32-36;
  • the harmonic progression at the transition between bars 34-35 was probably supposed to refer to the progression in bars 32-33, where there is C-c. Therefore, the psychological mechanism of overlooking the naturals could have been similar to the one that was responsible for omissions of the signs of the current key – here is the signs of the current harmonic context that would have been omitted.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Last key signature sign , Errors of GC

b. 37-38

composition: Op. 25 No 9, Etude in G♭ major

G1, d in GC & GE2

d-b, G in FE

G1, d in GE1

G1, d in GE3

B1, d in EE1

d-b, G in EE2

G1, d in EE3
..

In GC, the version beginning from G1 was written by Chopin instead of the original version of FE, beginning from the sixth. This undeniable improvement was also introduced in the base text to EE1, in which, however, it was reproduced inaccurately – both B1 at the beginning of the bar and the lack of tie sustaining d are most probably mistakes. In turn, EE1 includes a dot extending the des crotchet, overlooked in GC. This inaccuracy of the notation of GC was corrected only in GE3, which, thanks to this, is the only source in which the final version is written flawlessly.
The versions of EE2 and EE3 are a result of subsequent revisions – in EE2 it was the version of FE (only in the 1st half of bar 37) that was introduced, whereas in EE3 it was the final version that was reintroduced, yet in an inaccurately written form drawn from GE1.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections in GC