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. 632

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

e2 in FE (→EE)

e2 in GE
..

Stylistically speaking, the version of GE is absolutely possible – such melodic sequences can be quite frequently found in Chopin's pieces (cf. bar 610 or bar 66 in the 2nd mov. as well as, e.g. the Ballade in G Minor, Op. 23, bar 45 and 47). However, in this case, nothing supports the authenticity of that version – in similar contexts, in spite of the step of augmented second, Chopin used a harmonic note in bar 636 as well as in bar 624, 628 and 640.  

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 633

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

..

The notation of accidentals in FE, although faultless, is illogical – a cautionary  before e1 appears only just before the 4th quaver, while the  before c​​​​​​​2 is unnecessarily repeated in the 2nd group of semiquavers. The remaining editions took an attempt at ordering the notation:

  • in GE1 (→GE2), the before e1 was removed, whereas a natural was added before the G crotchet;
  • GE3 added naturals also before e2 and e1 in the 1st group and removed the superfluous ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ – this is the notation we apply in the main text;
  • in EE1, the  before e1 was moved to the 1st figure in the bar, and the superfluous  was removed;
  • in EE2, a  was added before G at the beginning of the bar;
  • in EE3, a  was added before e2 in the 1st group of semiquavers, which resulted in the same version as in GE3.
Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals

b. 634

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

..

In FE, one can see traces of correction of the 2nd quaver from g1 to e1.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 636

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

..

A sharp raising c2 to c​​​​​​​2 appears in FE (→GE1→GE2,→EE1→EE2) only just before the 4th quaver of the bottom voice. Chopin would write an accidental too late on a few occasions (e.g. in the Etude in F Major, Op. 10 No. 8, bar 43). An accidental at the beginning of the bar was added in EE3 and GE3, yet it was only GE3 that removed the  in the middle of the bar, unnecessary in this situation.  

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 639

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

g2 in FE (→EE)

b2 in GE
..

The b2 note, featured in GE as the 4th quaver of the bottom voice, is either the original version or, which is much more likely considering analogous bar 623 and 627, a Terzverschreibung error. The traces of proofreading visible in FE prove that the version was initially present also in this edition, but it was changed in the last phase of proofreading.   

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in GE