|
b. 295
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
All fingerings are compliant in the fragments where their ranges overlap. In the main text, we suggest a compilation of the entry of FED and the part of the entry of FEH that complements it, which specify the hand position in the initial part of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FED , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||||||
|
b. 295
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
We consider the slur of FE (→EE) to be inaccurate (shortened), most probably due to the notation of the topmost semiquavers on the upper stave, which interfered with a longer slur. In the main text, we suggest a longer slur, modelled after the authentic slur in bars 296 and 312. The slur in GE, starting later, which could be a revision or a mere inaccuracy, may, however, correspond to the notation of [A], since in similar contexts, it is sometimes very difficult to interpret slurs in Chopin's autographs. Therefore, one can consider the slur of GE3, although formally non-authentic, to be an acceptable variant. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||
|
b. 295
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we add a slur after the authentic slur in an identical situation in bars 311-312. The addition was introduced also in GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
||||||||||||
|
b. 295
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
A comparison with analogous bar 311 suggests that the absence of the slur is rather an inaccuracy of notation in this case. This conclusion is confirmed by the inconsistent and most probably incomplete slurs in the L.H. in this bar. Due to this reason, in the main text we suggest a two-bar slur modelled after bars 311-312. The slur was added also in EE3, yet without linking it to the next one, which may be considered an alternative attempt at reconstructing the notation of [A]. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions |
||||||||||||
|
b. 295
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The mark in EE3 was added undoubtedly under the influence of analogous bar 311, in which, however, the dynamic marks are generally different (even contradictory on the 3rd beat of the bar), and nothing suggests that Chopin would have accepted the possibility of compiling them. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
in