Issues : GE revisions
|
b. 667-670
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we prolong the wavy lines emphasising the duration of the trills. Neither the range of the wavy lines nor the fact whether they were used in the notation at all influences the performance manner of the trill, hence we choose the most suggestive notation. Chopin would write longer, continuous trills in various ways – cf. e.g. the Waltz in D category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 670
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The 2nd minim in the notation of the tremolando in FE is only the a2-b2 second. The missing f category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 671-674
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The slurs added in GE3 are modelled on the authentic slurs in analogous bars 99-102 and 111-114. The addition may be considered justified, although in the case of the second slur, the autograph – contrary to the editions – rather suggests leading it to the beginning of bar 675. In the main text, we leave the economical notation of FE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 675
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
The absence and change of the staccato mark in GE1 (→GE2) is probably a result of carelessness of the engraver. A dot for the R.H. was added in GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Wedges |
||||||||
|
b. 679
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In the main text, we add cautionary sharps before the f category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: GE revisions |
& 
Major, Op. 64 No. 1, bars 
3 is a patent mistake – cf. previous bars – corrected in 
