mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
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 11, Etude in A minor

Title & dedication in GC

Title & dedication in GE1

Title & dedication in GE2 (→GE3)

Title & dedication in FE

Title & dedication in EE1 & EE3

Title in EE2

Our suggestion
..

In the main text we give the title and dedication after the title page of the entire Opus in GC and FE.
See the Etude in A major, No. 1.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Dedications , GE revisions

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

..

The  indication was added by Chopin in GC (→GE). It was most probably similarly in the two remaining Stichvorlage manuscripts of the Etude, serving as base texts for FE and EE.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Authentic corrections in GC

b. 1-5

composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

in bar 5 in GC (→GE) & EE

in bar 1 in FE
..

Placing a metronome marking at the beginning of the Etude in FE is certainly a mistake. This edition adopted – in the entire Opus 25 and in other pieces – a graphical solution consisting in placing indications concerning metronome not above the notes (next to the tempo indication), yet in the indent of the first line of the note text. The rule was applied also here, not taking into account the fact that it is misleading in relation to the different tempo of the first four bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 1

composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

in GC, EE & GE2 (→GE3)

in FE & GE1
..

The use of the  time signature surprises only in GE1, as in FE the  indication was not used in the Etudes – contrary to the manuscripts – at all, both in Op. 25 and in Op. 10 and the Etude in F minor, Dbop. 36 No. 1 (cf. also the Impromptu in A major, Op. 29). In any case, the correctness and authenticity of the  time signature is undeniable towards the compatible version of GC and EE. The correct time signature was returned in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Changes of metre , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , 4/4 or 2/2

b. 4-5

composition: Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

Slur in GC (→GE) & EE

Slur in FE
..

Probably only one of these slurs is authentic, while the difference is a result of different interpretation of the notation of [A], perhaps inaccurate. In the main text we give the slur present in the base source – GC (→GE) – confirmed also in EE. Leading the bass line legato until A1 is justified as far as the performance point of view is concerned, yet the fermata suggests breaking the continuous course of music after bar 4.

category imprint: Differences between sources