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. 577

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

g in FE (→GE,EE)

f, our alternative suggestion
..

Different sound of the 4th quaver than in all analogous bars (bar 226, 234, 250 and 585; cf. also bar 65, 73 and 89) could have been intended by Chopin, e.g. with regard to a slightly different shape of the accompaniment line in the next bar. However, since a mistake of the engraver cannot be excluded, we alternatively suggest a version that is analogous to the remaining bars. Mistakes consisting in adjusting figurations to a regular scheme, particularly when it appeared in similar figures (identical even quavers are present in bars 573-575), are psychologically justified and can be encountered in Chopin's pieces on a number of occasions – cf. e.g. bar 594 or 542-543.  

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE

b. 577-585

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

​​​​​​​at end of bar in FE (→GE,EE)

​​​​​​​on 5th quaver suggested by the editors
..

Taking into account the explicit harmonic change on the 3rd beat of bar 577, it seems highly unlikely that Chopin would have envisaged the entire bar performed with one pedal. Therefore, the ​​​​​​​ mark is most probably placed inaccurately – the scheme from the previous bars was mechanically repeated. The suggestion given in the main text aims at correcting the inaccuracy in order to avoid an unjustified mix of harmonies. There is a similar situation in bar 585.  

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 581

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

Sixth in FE (→EE1→EE2)

Octave in GE & EE3
..

The version of GE must be erroneous, which is supported by the logic of the course of the melodic line, confirmed by the version of analogous bar 69 and 230. Locally, the mistake is not manifest, so the reviser of EE3, having apparently a great confidence in GE, introduced that version instead of the correct text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error

b. 581

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

Wedge in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

No mark in GE3
..

Omission of the wedge over G is most probably an oversight of the engraver of GE3, although one also cannot exclude a revision, motivated, e.g. by the missing staccato mark in similar bar 597.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 581-582

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

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fontana's fingering in EE
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions