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
Slurs
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Slurs

b. 290

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

Slur in FE (→EE)

No slur in GE

Our alternative suggestion
..

The slur, starting later than in the previous bar, seems to be an inaccuracy of notation only. However, the different slurring of analogous bars 304-306 prompts us to be prudent in such evaluations. In GE, the slur was completely omitted, perhaps as a result of doubts concerning its range.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 291

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

Slur over chords in sources

Slur to inner voice suggested by the editors
..

A comparison with the next bars indicates that the slur over the pair of chords is of motivic nature. It is bar 293 that is particularly pronounced, since the motif of the middle voice, encompassed with a slur, is a variant of the two-note f2-e2 motif in the discussed bar. Therefore, most probably, in this bar the slur also applies above all to the middle voice, which Chopin perhaps marked inaccurately or which the engraver did not understand. Taking that into account, as well as to avoid the implication that b2 should be sustained, in the main text, we move the slur, so that it points to the f2-e2 motif. There is a similar situation in bar 307. 

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 291-294

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

..

The traces of corrections visible in FE prove the Chopinesque proofreading of slurring. The removed slurs were shorter and, as it seems, incomplete – they encompassed, consecutively, 2 beats of bar 291, entire bar 292 and 2 beats of bar 293. Over the last beat of bar 293, there was the beginning of the slur continued in bar 294 (on a new line). It is difficult to evaluate whether these were corrections of mistakes and inaccuracies of the engraver or changes to the authentic, original slurring (perhaps both). There is a similar situation in bars 307-308.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 295

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

Slur from first note in FE (→EE)

Slur from 2nd note in GE1 (→GE2)

Longer slur in GE3

Longer slur suggested by the editors
..

We consider the slur of FE (→EE) to be inaccurate (shortened), most probably due to the notation of the topmost semiquavers on the upper stave, which interfered with a longer slur. In the main text, we suggest a longer slur, modelled after the authentic slur in bars 296 and 312. The slur in GE, starting later, which could be a revision or a mere inaccuracy, may, however, correspond to the notation of [A], since in similar contexts, it is sometimes very difficult to interpret slurs in Chopin's autographs. Therefore, one can consider the slur of GE3, although formally non-authentic, to be an acceptable variant.  

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 295

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

No slur in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

Slur in GE3

Slur suggested by the editors
..

In the main text, we add a slur after the authentic slur in an identical situation in bars 311-312. The addition was introduced also in GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions