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

Pitch

b. 391

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

g1 in FE (→EE1)

g2 in GE

g3 in EE2 (→EE3)
..

The version of GE is almost certainly a revision – it may be possible that the beginning of the octave sign was deemed erroneous, i.e. beginning too late. In turn, application of an analogous reasoning to the version of GE may explain the occurrence of the version of EE2 (→EE3). The fact that FE are free from mistakes is proved by an additional (apart from the already printed one), bold f3-g1 slur added by Chopin in FED. The melodic interval, connected with a slur, going beyond the span of an average hand, is an expressive procedure used by Chopin on a number of occasions (cf. e.g. the 2nd mov., bars 65-66, or the Nocturne in B major, op. 62 no. 1, bars 88-89).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 391

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

..

In FE, there is no  before f2, which was a frequently used procedure in this layout – it was the mark placed earlier before a note sounding an octave higher, but written at the same pitch that was considered to be valid. The remaining editions added a .

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions

b. 401

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

f1 in FE (→GE,EE)

f1 in FEH, probable reading
..

The mark in the form of a diagonal cross written in FEH before the 1st grace note of the bar is probably a ​​​​​​​ raising f​​​​​​​1 to f​​​​​​​​​​​​​​1. At the same time, it cannot be excluded that, according to the intention of the writing person, it should apply both to this grace note and the first out of four small notes ending the trill. However, we have to point out that this mark may be simply one of the crosses with which Chopin would often mark the places discussed during a lesson.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Authentic post-publication changes and variants , Annotations in FEH

b. 404

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

..

In the main text, we add a cautionary ​​​​​​​ before g2. The mark was added already in GE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 405

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

e1 in FE (→GE,EE)

c1-e1 suggested by the editors
..

The missing c1 note on the 3rd quaver may be a result of the engraver's oversight – cf. the adjacent bars. In such situations, it may be very difficult to state whether a note on a ledger line is featured in a dyad or in a chord in Chopin's autographs – cf. e.g. the Concerto in F minor, op. 21, the 3rd mov., bar 485. ​​​​​​​Due to this reason, in the main text, we suggest adding this note. 

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Uncertain notes on ledger lines