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. 553-554

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

Slurs in FE (→EE)

Slurs in GE

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

The fact that the slurs of FE (→EE) probably do not correspond to Chopin's final intention is proved by:

  • precise slurs (and staccato marks) in bar 550 and 552;
  • placement of  like in bar 550 and 552, and not at the beginning of the bar, like in bar 556;
  • changes of rhythm and slurring in exposition – see bar 197 – proving that the long slurs from the 1st semiquaver of the bar are the original version, then changed at different occasions (proofreading, pupil's copy). Therefore, it seems to be highly likely that Chopin left the original notation unchanged also here.

Taking into account the above, in the main text we move the point of division of the slurs by analogy with bar 550 and 552. The version of GE is probably a revision going in similar direction yet simplified.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 554

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

No mark in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

Wedge in GE3

Wedge suggested by the editors
..

In the main text, we suggest a wedge over the 1st semiquaver after bar 550 and 552 – cf. the adjacent note. The mark was added in GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 554

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

No mark in FE (→GE,EE)

Accent suggested by the editors
..

In the main text, we add an accent over the syncopated chord after bar 199.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 554

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

..

In the main text, we omit the cautionary  before f​​​​​​​3, present in FE (→GE). The accidental was omitted also in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals

b. 555

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

e2 in FE

e2 in GE, EE & FEJ
..

The sharp before the last semiquaver in FE is almost certainly a mistake – it is proved by comparison with analogous bar 196, 200 and 551, supported by deletion of the unnecessary accidental in FEJ. The awkward e2-d2 sequence, omitting the chordal e2, drew the attention of both the revisers of GE and EE. The traces of corrections visible in FE prove that the discussed note was corrected from d2 to e2, which allows us, to a certain extent, understand the mechanism of the mistake – the proofreading was definitely aimed at e2, yet along with a notehead, the engraver erroneously moved also the  (cf. the Sonata in B​​​​​​​ Minor, Op. 35, 3rd mov., bar 20)​​​​​​.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Annotations in FEJ