mUltimate Chopin

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. 221-222

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

..

In GE, the bars are separated with a double bar line, which was a routine procedure while changing the key signature. In the main text, we preserve the undoubtedly authentic notation of FE (→EE) with a single bar line – Chopin's autographs prove that the composer generally did not use double bar lines at the time of changing the key (cf. e.g. the Mazurka in C major, op. 24, no. 2, bar 56). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 221

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

Fingering written into FED

Fingering written into FEH

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fontana's fingering in EE
..

In the main text, we include the entry in FED, whose authenticity is highly likely. The same digit – along a few more – is given also by FEH; in turn, EE has a different fingering in this part of the passage, maintaining the hand position from the 1st half of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FED , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH

b. 221

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

..

In the main text, we add a cautionary  before f3. The accidental was added only in GE3. Interestingly, FE includes a cautionary  before f​​​​​​​1 in the L.H., which was not repeated both in GE and EE1 (→EE2). The accidental may have been added in the last phase of proofreading, which would explain its absence in GE; in EE, it was overlooked or considered unnecessary (it was added in EE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 221

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

..

In FE, there is no  raising b2 to b​​​​​​​2. The inaccuracy, most probably repeated after [A], was corrected in GE and EE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 221

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

d1-f​​​​​​​1 tied in FE (→GE,EE)

d1-f​​​​​​​1 repeated in FEH

Our variant suggestion
..

In FEH, the ties of the d1-f1 third were crossed out. The authenticity of this variant seems to be highly likely if we take into account a number of other, almost certainly Chopinesque, variants entered into that copy. The manner the marks were crossed out resembles the Chopinesque one – cf. e.g. crossings-out in the pupil's copy of the Nocturne in D​​​​​​​ Major, Op. 27 No. 2, bar 45. In the main text, we signalise the possibility of omitting the ties with brackets.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Authentic post-publication changes and variants , Annotations in FEH