mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Corrections in A

b. 50-51

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

3-note slur in Atut (→FE→GE1→GE2)

4-note slur in EE & GE3
..

The shorter slur in Atut (→FE→GE1→GE2) is the original marking. Initially, both slurs in the previous figure also encompassed the groups of three quavers only; however, they were then prolonged by Chopin. The slur in the L.H. in the discussed bars, written last, already encompasses the entire four-note motif. The fact of leaving the slur in the R.H. without extension must be the composer's inadvertence.  

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , GE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place

b. 60-61

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

Slur to bar 61 in Atut

Slur in bar 60 in FE (→GE)

2 slurs in bar 60 in EE
..

The slur in Atut reaches the E1-E octave and it was extended to that end. However, after having written the 1st half of bar 61, Chopin deleted the octave to change the manner of notation of the R.H. part. The discussed slur was not crossed, but in rewritten bar 61, the ending of the slur was not repeated, which explains its shorter range in the editions. A separate slur for the top notes of the octaves added in EE must be an editorial revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 61

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

e1 in both parts in Atut

e1 in upper part in FE (→GE,EE)
..

Chopin would gradually shape the notation of the R.H. part in the first half of this bar. Initially, he tried to write down the "harmonic legato" – holding the elements of the chord constituting the figuration with fingers – through rhythmic values:  or . It was still in Atut that the notation was simplified and the notes that were supposed to be held were marked with the legato indication. In the proofreading of FE (→GE,EE), the composer introduced the maximally transparent, two-part notation and changed legato to legatiss.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 84

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

..

The accompaniment in this bar evolved in Atut, which is proved by the previous versions, which were crossed out but are still legible. According to us, one can distinguish three stages in total, the last of which was accepted as the final version. The reconstructions of the previous versions presented below are hypothetical to a certain extent – changes of the figurations' shape are unquestionable, but it remains uncertain how certain notes (harmonic legato) were assigned to the particular versions:

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A

b. 86

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

..

The g1-g2 minim removed in Atut is probably a result of Chopin's mistake, who, starting a new page of the manuscript, began writing the first bar of the theme. 

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A