mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors repeated in GE

b. 410

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

..

In FE (→GE1→GE2), the last semiquaver is already embraced with the octave sign, used for the notation of the 1st beat of the next bar. The mistake was corrected in GE3 and formally also in EE, in which the entire octave sign was removed (overlooked?).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE

b. 424

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

..

In the sources, there are no sharps before the d2 and d​​​​​​​3 semiquavers. It results from a different rule of validity of accidentals from the one applied generally in contemporary editions where a part of a bar is written with the use of an octave sign. In Chopin's times, a mark next to a note encompassed with an octave sign was often considered valid also for a note written at the same pitch, yet not encompassed with an octave sign.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 434

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

..

In FE (→EE1,GE1→GE2), the 1st quaver is not encompassed with the octave sign. This patent mistake was rectified in EE2 (→EE3) and GE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 482-484

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

..

In FE, there are no accidentals before the 7th semiquaver in the L.H. in bar 482 and the penultimate semiquaver in the R.H. in bars 483 and 484. Therefore, those notes should be interpreted as f and f1, which would interfere with the regularity of the figuration, undoubtedly intended here by Chopin. The first two oversights were corrected in GE and in EE2 (→EE3), probably on the basis thereof. The mistake in bar 484 remained uncorrected in all editions.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 541-542

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

No slur in FE (→GE1→GE2)

New slur in EE

Extension of slur to end of bar 541 in GE3

Extension of slur to bar 542 suggested by the editors
..

The missing slur must be inadvertence. In EE, the slurring was completed in the simplest manner by adding a slur over the part of the phrase without it. In the main text, we suggest an adequate extension of the slur from the previous bar, in accordance with the slurs in all 5 analogous places. A similar revision was introduced in GE3; however, the slur was led only to the last semiquaver in bar 541.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors repeated in GE