mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors resulting from corrections

b. 555

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

e2 in FE

e2 in GE, EE & FEJ
..

The sharp before the last semiquaver in FE is almost certainly a mistake – it is proved by comparison with analogous bar 196, 200 and 551, supported by deletion of the unnecessary accidental in FEJ. The awkward e2-d2 sequence, omitting the chordal e2, drew the attention of both the revisers of GE and EE. The traces of corrections visible in FE prove that the discussed note was corrected from d2 to e2, which allows us, to a certain extent, understand the mechanism of the mistake – the proofreading was definitely aimed at e2, yet along with a notehead, the engraver erroneously moved also the  (cf. the Sonata in B​​​​​​​ Minor, Op. 35, 3rd mov., bar 20)​​​​​​.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Annotations in FEJ

b. 607

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

Fifth in FE, literal reading

Only minim in GE

Appoggiatura & minim in EE

Acciaccatura – our alternative suggestion
..

The vague and most probably erroneous notation of FE was probably supposed to look like the one applied two bars later – a d2 minim preceded by an a2 grace note. We adopt this obvious interpretation in the main text; it was applied already in EE. In turn, the version of GE may be the original version, completed by Chopin in the last proofreading of FE. We give a short grace note as an acceptable variant – see bar 609.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 667-670

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

..

In FE, the middle notes of the tremolando that double the trill are devoid of extending dots. The inaccuracy was corrected in the remaining editions.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors

b. 670

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

..

The 2nd minim in the notation of the tremolando in FE is only the a2-b2 second. The missing f​​​​​​​3 is a patent mistake – cf. previous bars – corrected in GE and EE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions

b. 715-716

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Slurs in A, literal reading

Slurs in A (interpretation→FC)

Continuous slur in FE (→EE) & GE

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

The continuous slur in FE (→EE) stems from the corrections in A, as a result of which the slur from b. 715, leading to the final, crossed-out fragment of the line, seems to suggest continuation. The situation misled also the copyist, who led that slur in FC to the next bar (which does not take place in A). Consequently, the slurs converged on the grace note, which the engraver of GE1 interpreted as one slur. This unanimity of the editors is startling if we take into account the fact that in the manuscripts the slur that starts in b. 715 is led under the notes, whereas the next one – over the notes, and nothing suggests that they should be merged. In the main text in b. 715 we give a literal interpretation of the slur of A, which does not reach the next bar, whereas in b. 716 – the slur of FC, compliant with the more accurate, according to us, slur of the manuscripts in b. 720. The issue of range of the slur over b. 716 – see b. 718-719. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , Deletions in A