mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors repeated in GE

b. 410

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

..

In FE (→GE1→GE2), the last semiquaver is already embraced with the octave sign, used for the notation of the 1st beat of the next bar. The mistake was corrected in GE3 and formally also in EE, in which the entire octave sign was removed (overlooked?).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE

b. 420

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

..

In the L.H. part, there are erroneous c​​​​​​​2-b1 semiquavers in GE1. A similar mistake was present also in FE; however, it was corrected therein, probably in the last phase of proofreading. The subsequent GE contain the correct text.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in GE

b. 422

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

..

In A (→GE→FE) there is no  restoring g2 on the 3rd beat of this bar. This patent oversight – cf. analogous bar 414 – was corrected only in EE. An identical mistake is to be found in A also in the two remaining appearances of similar figures (bars 454 and 462). In this type of texture, Chopin considered both voices independently, to a significant extent, hence an alteration forming part of the chromatic progression in the top voice did not influence the notes of the bottom voice, constituting the harmonic base, in the internal hearing of the composer. Cf. numerous mistakes of this kind and inaccuracies in the Etude in A minor, op. 10 no. 2, e.g. in bars 1 and 5, as well as in an opposite situation in the 1st mov. of the Concerto, bars 302 and 304.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE

b. 424

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

..

In the sources, there are no sharps before the d2 and d​​​​​​​3 semiquavers. It results from a different rule of validity of accidentals from the one applied generally in contemporary editions where a part of a bar is written with the use of an octave sign. In Chopin's times, a mark next to a note encompassed with an octave sign was often considered valid also for a note written at the same pitch, yet not encompassed with an octave sign.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 429

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

b in FE (→EE) & GE3

d1 in GE1 (→GE2)
..

The version of GE1 (→GE2), distorting the sequence of bass (implemented by cellos and double basses), must be erroneous. However, the traces of proofreading visible in FE prove that it was the engraver of this edition that committed a mistake, yet in GE1 the note was revised by adding an admittedly overlooked ​​​​​​​, while in FE (→EE) it was moved to the right pitch. The correct version was introduced also in GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in GE