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

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 615

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

​​​​​​​in FE (→EE).

No sign in GE
..

The missing ​​​​​​​ hairpin in GE is most probably an oversight, although it may have been added in the last phase of proofreading of FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 616

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

Accent in FE (→EE)

No mark in GE

Long accent suggested by the editors

Our alternative suggestion
..

The accent, placed in FE (→EE) over the non-played note, must have been inaccurately reproduced. According to Chopin, it could have applied to the b1-b​​​​​​​2 octave at the beginning of the bar or to d2 in the bottom voice. In the main text, we adopt the latter, since it interferes with the original notation to a lesser extent (we give a long accent, much more likely in this context). Omission of the mark in GE is probably an oversight.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Placement of markings

b. 618

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

​​​​​​​in FE (→GE,EE)

Long accent over L.H. suggested by the editors

, our alternative suggestion
..

Like in bar 618, one can assume that the ​​​​​​​ mark placed under a tied, hence non-played note, was placed inaccurately. We suggest two possible interpretations of the mark:

  • a long accent over the L.H. – the mark would be inaccurately placed in terms of its vertical position (cf. bar 617);
  • diminuendo encompassing the quintuplet in the R.H., assuming an accurate placement in terms of its horizontal position.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Placement of markings , Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 620

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

8 staccato dots in FE (→EE)

9 dots in GE
..

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. 621-640

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

..

In FE, in the majority of 24 bars of this section, the trilled crotchet is provided with an accent (in bars 621-625, 627-629, 631-634 and 636-637, 14 in total). The markings in the last 7 bars were most probably overlooked – these are the last two lines of text on a page. Taking into account the fact that an accent is undoubtedly one of the elements defining the characteristic and regularly repeated rhythmic scheme in this place, we consider also the three remaining oversights to be inaccuracies of notation and we add accents in all bars. The remaining editions added marks, but it was only GE3 that added them in all bars. See notes to bars 626-635, 638-640 and 641-644.

Two out of the accents in FE are long (bar 624 and 629). A few can be interpreted as short or long (bar 625 and 633-637). The remaining seven are short, hence in the main text we unify the notation by giving short accents in all places.  

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information