mUltimate Chopin

Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

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

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 8

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

 in A

Two signs in FE (→EE)

 in GE
..

The additional  sign, placed in FE (→EE) between the staves, seems to be added during a proofreading, thus correct. The hairpins could refer to the R.H., which would cause problems (crescendo on a long note), or to the left one, where they would double the sign placed under the semiquavers. Due to this fact, we think that the most likely explanation is the following: the sign put in A under the semiquavers in the L.H. was erroneously reproduced in FE over them. In the last proofreading of FE (not included in GE) Chopin added the second  under the L.H., confirming his intention of providing the progression of semiquavers with this sign. Therefore, in the main text we give only the hairpins of A. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 10-11

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

Accents in A

Accent in FE (→GE,EE)

Our interpretation of accents in A
..

The accent in bar 10 in A is shorter than a few previous ones and the one in bar 11; however, it seems to be an inaccurate notation. In the editions the sign in bar 11 was omitted.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 21-22

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

Marks in A, literal reading

A, possible interpretation

No marks in FE (→GE,EE)

Long accent suggested by the editors
..

The signs visible in A at the beginning of these bars have an almost identical shape, however, the one in bar 21 is almost three times bigger. The second sign seems to be a quite typical long accent, yet it is unclear whether the same can be said of the first one. This is even more complicated by the fact that none of them is included in FE (→GE,EE). In the main text we propose a long accent in bar 22, which does not raise any graphical nor musical doubts.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 23

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

Accent in A

No mark in FE (→GE,EE)

A, interpretation suggested by the editors
..

The accent of A, perhaps accidentally omitted in the editions, may either be assigned to the R.H. (our main text) or to the left one.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 24

composition: Op. 10 No 6, Etude in E♭ minor

 in A

FE (→EE,GE1→GE2→GE3→GE4)

 in GE5
..

In the main text we give the hairpins after A. In FE (→GE,EE) they were aligned to the third of the upper voice, which most probably was a manner of the engraver of FE. In GE5 the direction of the mark was reversed.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Sign reversal