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

Verbal indications

b. 177

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

..

One can ponder whether the placement of the staccato indication only just in the 2nd half of the bar is not an example of the Chopinesque manner of placing indications within their range of validity. In other words, whether one should not perform the entire chromatic sequence in this bar staccato. According to us, no – such placed indication most probably means that the first few notes are to be performed legato and then the articulation is to be gradually changed, so that the last few notes are clearly performed staccato. There is a similar situation in bar 532.  

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 179

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

No indication in FE (→GE,EE)

[legatiss.] suggested by the editors
..

In the main text, we suggest adding the legatiss. indication, given by Chopin in analogous bar 534.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 275

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

  in FE, literal reading

 in GE

 in EE
..

When interpreted literally, the  mark in FE falls on a rest. This inaccuracy is most probably a result of a too literal reproduction of the notation of [A], in which Chopin could have not had enough space to write the mark between the bottom stave and the b semiquaver. In the main text, we assume, in accordance with GE and EE, that the mark concerns the beginning of the 2nd beat of the bar. The absence of  in GE is most probably an oversight.

Learn more »

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE

b. 275

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

No indication in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

a tempo in GE3
..

The a tempo indication added in GE3, in spite of its evident accuracy, certainly does not come from Chopin. 

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 281-282

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

FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

GE3
..

The position of ritenuto in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2), i.e. the end of bar 281, is probably erroneous:

  • adopting the natural assumption that ritenuto is to be applied until risoluto in bar 283 (cf. bars 407-408), we are faced with an almost a bar-and-a-half-long slowdown, the longest of the ones marked by Chopin in this movement of the Concerto. After a merely 8-bar-long prelude to the final figurational section of the exposition; according to us, such a pronounced slowdown is unjustified;
  • the 3rd beat of bar 281 and the 2nd of bar 282 are graphically identical, which could have provoked the engraver's mistake.

A corresponding change was suggested already in GE3.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions