mUltimate Chopin

Op. 25 No 11, Etude in A minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

b. 45

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

c1 in GC (→GE), EE1 & EE3

No c1 in FE & EE2
..

The missing c1 note in FE – provided that it is not an error of the engraver – seems to be the original version, cf. bar 47. Lack of traces of its deletion reduces the likelihood of removing this note by Chopin almost to none. The note was removed – under the influence of FE – in EE2, in order to be reintroduced in EE3, this time on the basis of GE. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 46

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

a2 in GC (→GE1) & FE (routine interpretation), EE & GE2 (→GE3)

a2 in GC (→GE1) & FE (contextual interpretation)
..

Before the 5th, 15th, 19th and 23rd semiquaver in GC (→GE1) and FE there is no accidental, so all of them should be interpreted as a2. In the 2nd half of the bar it is certainly erroneous, which induced the reviser of GE2 (→GE3) to consider the whole bar as an example of overlooking the sign of the current key and adding a  already next to the first of the aforementioned notes. A flat in this place is present also in EE, which could generally correspond to Chopin's notation in the base text to this edition. According to us, it is, however, more likely that in EE we are also dealing with an intervention of the reviser:

  • in a similar melodic turn in bar 48 the 5th semiquaver is an e2, moreover, in the sources there is no  returning e2 in the 2nd half of the bar;
  • Chopin undoubtedly heard a2 only in the 2nd half of the bar, where it is obvious due to A in the bass. Therefore, the first half of the bar could have been written faultlessly, although in a confusing manner, if we take into consideration the A major key, reaffirmed in the previous bar.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 48

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

..

The natural returning e2 is present only in GE and EE3. There is no doubt that we are dealing with Chopin's oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions

b. 49

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

in GC (→GE) & EE3

No marking in FE & EE1 (→EE2)
..

It is hard to say how the situation, in which  written in GC (→GE) most probably with the copyist's hand does not appear both in FE and EE1 (→EE2), occurred. In any case, a kind of mistake seems to be more likely (probably an oversight) than removal of this indication by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 50

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

..

In GC, FE and EE1 (→EE2) there is no  returning a2. This patent inaccuracy was corrected in GE and EE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of GC