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. 649

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

​​​​​​​in FE (→EE)

​​​​​​​ in GE
..

Both the change of indication from  to  and omission of the accent are most probably mistakes of the engraver of GE, although it is easier to imagine an overlooked 'z' in ​​​​​​​ at the time of reading the autograph, hence in FE. Therefore, it is possible that one or both inaccuracies were initially present in FE, in which, however, Chopin corrected them in the last phase of proofreading.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , fz – f

b. 667

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

marcato between staves in FE (→EE)

marcato over L.H. in GE
..

The marcato indication almost certainly refers to the thematic motif in the L.H., which is indicated by the meaning of that indication and by a comparison with analogous bar 229. Engravers would often misplace indications and other marks or assign them to the wrong hand.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 668-670

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

cresc. in FE (→EE)

No indication in GE
..

The missing cresc. - - - indication in GE may mean that Chopin added it in the last proofreading of FE. In EE, the indication was divided into syllables.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE