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. 585

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

R.H. accent in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

No mark in GE3

L.H. long accent suggested by the editors
..

In the sources, placing an accent under the tied note of the R.H., which deprives the mark of its actual meaning, suggests an inaccuracy in reproducing the Stichvorlage. In the main text, we repeat the notation of the analogous bar of exposition (bar 235) – a long accent over the L.H. part. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 586

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

​​​​​​​at end of bar in FE (→GE,EE)

​​​​​​​on 5th quaver suggested by the editors

Our alternative suggestion
..

Performing the entire bar on one pedal leads to an unjustified mix of harmonies at the end of the bar, hence in the main text we adjust the position of the ​​​​​​​ mark in order to avoid it (cf. bar 577 and 585). A possibility that the markings in this bar are to be considered a general con pedale indication, hence differently than in the adjacent bars, seems to be less likely; we suggest a possible implementation of that interpretation as an alternative solution. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

b. 586

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

No slur in FE (→GE1→GE2)

Slur in EE & GE3
..

Omission of one bar in slurring of such accompanying figures must be considered an inaccuracy. Therefore, in the main text we include the whole-bar slur added already in EE and GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 587

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

f ​​​​​​​in FE (→GE,EE)

a​​​​​​​, our alternative suggestion
..

In the main text, we keep the version of FE (→GE,EE), despite the fact that a comparison with analogous bar 75 and 237 suggests a Terzverschreibung mistake on the 3rd quaver of the bar – in the printed version, the doubled leading note contributes to latent parallel f-f1 ⇒​​​​​​​ g-g1 octaves at the moment of resolution. A Terzverschreibung mistake belongs to the most frequently committed pitch errors  – cf. e.g. bar​​​​​​​ 290 and 308 of this movement of the Concerto or bar 73 and 108 of the second movement).

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Terzverschreibung error

b. 588

composition: Op. 31, Scherzo in B♭ minor

..

In EE1 the bottom note of the L.H. crotchet is an erroneous A1. The mistake was initially also in FE, in which, however, it was corrected during the proofreading, perhaps by Chopin's orders. The mistake was also rectified in EE2 (→EE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in EE