mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Centrally placed marks

b. 1

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

 in Atut, literal reading

 in Atut, possible interpretation

 in Atut (other interpretation→FE→GE,EE)
..

The manner the  mark is written in Atut makes it unclear whether the mark concerns the beginning of the piece or the beginning of bar 1, like it was interpreted in FE (→GE,EE). In the main text we adopt the second interpretation, since according to the most frequently applied rule, the marks are written in the place from which they are valid or slightly earlier. A dynamic mark after the bar line separating the upbeat can be found in Chopinesque autographs – cf. e.g. the Etude in A minor, op. 25, no. 4.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 16

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

 in Atut

 in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

 in GE3
..

The dynamic mark is written in Atut between two chords, so that in the majority of the sources it was assigned to the 3rd beat of the bar. According to us, however, the texture clearly indicates that the new dynamics should be valid already from the 1st chord, which is confirmed by the indications in the orchestral parts. Therefore, the notation of Atut is an example of a manner of placing marks within the range of their validity, sometimes used by Chopin. Due to this reason, in the main text we give  on the 2nd beat of the bar. Such an interpretation was applied also in GE3. There is a similar situation in bar 20.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Centrally placed marks

b. 45

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

 in Atut (literal reading→FE→GE,EE)

 in Atut, possible contextual interpretation

 suggested by the editors
..

The position of the  mark, in spite of the compliance of all sources, is questionable. It is most probably an example of the Chopinesque manner of writing indications within the range of their validity; however, it is unclear whether Chopin conceived  already at the beginning of the bar, like it was indicated in the orchestral parts (), or from the semiquaver tremolando. In a similar context in bars 99 and 111,  is written already at the beginning of the bar, which we consider to be a hint at the time of choosing the version to the main text. 

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Centrally placed marks

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.  

category imprint: Source & stylistic information

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 501

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

​​​​​​​ in GE3

​​​​​​​suggested by the editors
..

The fact of assigning ​​​​​​​ to the 3rd beat must be a result of misunderstanding the notation of [A] ​​​​​​​– see bar 16. The version of GE3 is a result of a complex, arbitrary revision modifying dynamics – here and in bar 15 and 19 – on the basis of dynamics of the orchestral part, written down in FEorch (→GEorch). 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Centrally placed marks