Issues : GE revisions
|
b. 145-146
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we give the interpretation of the curved line of FE (→GE1→GE2) adopted in EE and GE3. The Chopinesque manner of writing ties as short curved lines reaching the prolonging note would frequently result in their erroneous interpretation. However, other possibilities cannot be excluded – the curved line in the autograph could have been led over the top voice, since moving slurs to the side of note heads was a routine procedure, frequently applied by engravers. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 149
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In FE (→GE1), the last 8 notes are written as 2 groups of semiquavers. The division into groups suggests that Chopin meant a strict and regular division, so the notes should be demisemiquavers. A respective change was introduced in EE and GE2 (→GE3). Additional beams were added also in FEJ, although it is impossible to confirm the authenticity of such a non-characteristic entry. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Annotations in FEJ , Errors repeated in GE |
||||||
|
b. 149
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In FE, there is no 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. 150-151
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
Placing the accents only under the L.H. part, incomprehensible from the musical point of view, is probably a result of an inaccurate reproduction of the autograph's notation. According to us, Chopin most probably wrote the accents between the parts of both hands, which could not be repeated in print. Taking that into account, in the main text we add accents over the R.H. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 153
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The slur in FE (→EE) is most probably inaccurate, hence in the main text, we give the version of GE, which, according to us, guesses correctly Chopin's possible notation. Too spacious slurs, written with a flourish, are a frequent phenomenon in the Chopinesque autographs. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
raising d1 to d
1, which must be considered an inaccuracy, since d
