|
b. 619-620
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we adopt the enhanced notation, used in GE and EE. The notation of FE is probably earlier, since in the vast majority of similar bars it was changed by Chopin to the latter. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place |
||||||||
|
b. 620
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The missing accidental before the 4th semiquaver in FE (→GE1→GE2) must be an oversight – in such figures, enveloping the initial note like a grupetto (very frequent in Chopin's output), two bottommost notes constitute an interval of a minor or major second, but not augmented. We add a category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 620
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In FE, it is unclear whether the last note of the bottom voice should be encompassed with the slur or not. In the main text, we lead the slur to the penultimate note in the belief that Chopin used here portato articulation, which he marked with dots under a slur. In EE, the slur encompasses the entire group of 9 notes, which can be considered a variant, since such an interpretation is equally likely. The missing slur in GE and the con forza indication in FE, placed too low, which impeded drawing the slur, suggests that the slur was added in the last phase of proofreading of FE. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 620
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The additional dot in GE seems to be a routine addition of the engraver, convinced of the mark having been overlooked in FE. On the other hand, such an oversight cannot be excluded. In the main text, we stick to the version of the principal source – FE, which is also supported by the fact that the articulation of the final demisemiquaver results from the rhythmic context and does not require specification. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 620
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we add a digit defining the rhythmically homogeneous irregular group, in accordance with the layout of the quavers in the L.H. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
1 in 
, which is most likely in this place (cf. e.g. bar 220). The accidental was added already in 
