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. 311-312

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

Slur in FE

Slur in GE1 (→GE2)

Slurs in EE

Slurs in GE3

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

The missing slur in the first half of the bar is probably an oversight, either of the engraver of FE or Chopin, cf. analogous bar 295. However, the slur added in EE is almost certainly arbitrary, whereas the one in GE3 – modelled after the most probably inaccurate slur in the aforementioned bar 295. In the main text, we suggest adding a slur in the entire first half of the bar, just like in bar 295.
The second slur in the discussed bar, written too early, is an inaccuracy of GE. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 311

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

..

In the main text, we add a cautionary  before c2.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 311

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

No indication in FE (→GE,EE)

 in FEH

(), our alternative suggestion
..

Although the  marking was probably not written by Chopin's hand, it may be an authentic teaching comment – cf. dolce in analogous bar 295. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FEH

b. 311-325

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

..

category imprint:

b. 311

composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major

Staccato dot in FE (→EE)
..

The lack of staccato dot for the e2 quaver is most probably an oversight of the engraver of GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE