Alert icon
We're changing our privacy policy. This stuff matters.  Learn more  Dismiss

Chopin Etude in E, Op. 10 no. 3

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
22,722
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Feb 1, 2007

PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING A COMMENT ABOUT
"WRONG NOTES ON MM. 30 and 34":

Prof. Jan Ekier edited the ETUDES in 2000, for the National Edition of the Works of Fryderyk Chopin, Polish Chopin Institute.
He presents the text I play in mm. 30 and 34 as the most reliable, after analysis of two Chopin autograph copies, one in Pierpont Morgan Library, New York, and the other in the F. Chopin Society in Warsaw.
He discusses all the variants in his source commentary, which I encourage anyone interested in this matter to read.
What qualifies as the text of the Chopin Etude? By universal agreement, what Chopin himself wrote. What happens if the published edition doesn't represent accurately what Chopin wrote? Then we create a problem: people that only know a published version and probably a recording will say that what Chopin wrote is 'wrong', simply because that's all they know. Peace!

Miguel Campinho plays Chopin Etude. Live Recording. Feel free to leave your thoughts on the piece, the performance, the performer, anything!!!

Category:

Music

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 3 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:

Uploader Comments (campinho)

  • "WRONG NOTES ON MM. 30 and 34"!!!!!!!

    Here we go:

    Jan Ekier edited the ETUDES in 2000, for the National Edition of the Works of Fryderyk Chopin, Polish Chopin Institute.

    He presents the text I play in mm. 30 and 34 as the most reliable, after analysis of two Chopin autograph copies, one in Pierpont Morgan Library, New York, and the other in the F. Chopin Society in Warsaw.

    He discusses all the variants in his source commentary, which I encourage anyone interested in this matter to read.

  • you are WRONG, in the middle part, you have two wrong notes, maybe is your edition, i am sure the Paderewski Edition is the best for chopin

  • This is an old issue already, the Paderewski is the OLD Complete Works Edition. Check the NEW Complete Works Edition (Chopin Institute Warsaw), you will find this variant in there. This is, incidentally, the edition now recommended in the Warsaw International Chopin Competition...

  • can anyone share the music notes?

  • Just go to imslp . org, and do a search for Op. 10 Etudes. The edition I used here, however, is only available in print (National Edition, Jan Ekier ed.). Enjoy!

Top Comments

  • We don't give a crap about his mistakes because to us, the public, it still sounded wonderful. Overly critical people like you should die. Keep your fancy-pancy technical crap to yourself and your colleagues.

  • ''Can anyone who has heard this music, i mena truly heard it. Realy be a bad person?''

see all

All Comments (49)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • I love it and he does a fine job. I am 67 years old and this has been one of my favorites.

    I could listen to him play this for me many times over. Well done my friend!!!!!!!

  • There is nothing wrong! Ekier's edition is the most accurate and this is played correctly!

  • I will take up the "wrong notes" issue one more time, in a later post. About tempo, most people simply ignore Chopin's metronome indication of "8th-note = 100" for this etude. No one plays it that fast, but no one has the license to play it too slow. Incidentally, most people that play it too slow try very hard to match Chopin's metronome markings in the fast etudes. One wonders...

  • I have 2 different printed versions for this part, the one played here sounds weird, not Chopin, so I suppose is a transcription error.

  • bar 31 and 35 are wrong! i have the paderewski edition and what he plays and what is printed are two differant things!!

    theres a nother bar that was messed up too at 40- 41.

    two much of the inner voice.

    the melody didnt sing like it should.

  • Ah.... but what notes.

  • Yeah, i heard two wrong notes. At 1.44, the repeat of the first bar of that phrase is supposed to be natural, as is the repeat in the D# minor phrase that is after. I checked both editions. They are exactly the same. But anyways, apart from that, this is perfect and I say very good job!!

Loading...

0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more