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. 390

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

 in FE

 in GE & EE

 with  suggested by the editors
..

In the sources, there is no  under the turn mark; however, the 'post' visible within the mark of FE –  – was used to mark that the bottom note of the turn is to be raised (see, e.g. the Nocturne in B major, op. 62 no. 1, bar 21, in which Chopin marked a turn with the  mark in one of the autographs, whereas in another one, he wrote it with small notes, the bottom of which is raised). It is also noteworthy that the mark in FE is reversed, which may suggest an unnatural order of the interchanged notes in this context (first the bottom, then the top one). Such a notation, probably accidental, was not repeated both in GE and EE. In the main text, we give the generally adopted notation corresponding to the most likely performance of the turn.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 390-391

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

..

In GE1 (→GE2), bar 390 is the last one in the line of text, which probably caused an inaccuracy in the notation of the slur running from f3 – its ending was overlooked in bar 391. It is also possible that the missing ending of the slur is a side effect of the revision of the pitch of the 1st quaver in bar 391. In GE3, the slur was completely omitted.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE

b. 390-391

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

 & long accents in FE (probable reading)

  ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​in FE (possible reading→EE,GE1→GE2)

Longer   ​​​​​​​in GE3
..

In FE, the meaning of the short diminuendo hairpin at the beginning of the 2nd half of the bar is unclear. The marks' size resembles long accents, yet they are placed directly under the 3rd semiquaver triplet. Therefore, we consider long accents or ​​​​​​​ to be the most likely interpretations; the latter was adopted both in GE1 (→GE2) and EE. Extending each mark so that they cover a half of the bar is an arbitrary revision of GE3.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 390-391

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

..

FE is missing the sharps raising e3 to e​​​​​​​3. The accidentals were added in the remaining editions.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 390-391

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

Separate slurs in A (→FC→GE1, #→FE→EE)

COntinuous slur in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The version of GE2 (→GE3) is a result of a revision unifying the slurring with b. 369-370.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions