mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

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. 56-59

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

..

In Atut, Chopin wrote these bars almost as if there were 3 sharps in the key signature (the A major key) – he overlooked the majority of the sharps raising c(1,2) to c(1,2), both sharps raising g1 to g1 and the  raising d1 to d1 in bar 57. All overlooked marks were added in FE (→GE,EE).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , FE revisions

b. 60-61

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

Slur to bar 61 in Atut

Slur in bar 60 in FE (→GE)

2 slurs in bar 60 in EE
..

The slur in Atut reaches the E1-E octave and it was extended to that end. However, after having written the 1st half of bar 61, Chopin deleted the octave to change the manner of notation of the R.H. part. The discussed slur was not crossed, but in rewritten bar 61, the ending of the slur was not repeated, which explains its shorter range in the editions. A separate slur for the top notes of the octaves added in EE must be an editorial revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 61

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

e1 in both parts in Atut

e1 in upper part in FE (→GE,EE)
..

Chopin would gradually shape the notation of the R.H. part in the first half of this bar. Initially, he tried to write down the "harmonic legato" – holding the elements of the chord constituting the figuration with fingers – through rhythmic values:  or . It was still in Atut that the notation was simplified and the notes that were supposed to be held were marked with the legato indication. In the proofreading of FE (→GE,EE), the composer introduced the maximally transparent, two-part notation and changed legato to legatiss.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 61

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

legato in Atut

legatiss. in FE (→GE,EE)
..

In the proofreading of FE (→GE,EE), Chopin changed legato to legatiss.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 61

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

No indication in Atut

in FE (→GE,EE)
..

The emergence of the  indication must result from Chopin's proofreading in FE (→GE,EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE