Issues : Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 285

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

 in FE

Shifted  in GE

Longer  in EE

..

Since the obvious destination of the  hairpin is the  in the next bar, in the main text, we extend the mark present in FE correspondingly. An identical retouch was introduced already in EE, whereas in GE, the mark was moved (without extending it), so that it reaches the end of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 286

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

 in FE (→EE,GE1GE2)

Longer  in GE3

..

Differently than in the previous bar, the extension of the  hairpin is not justified here, since the destination of the crescendo was not explicitly indicated – in bar 287, there is no . After all, a shorter mark does not determine the performance manner – one can consider it a suggestion that the climax should occur slightly earlier to prepare the upcoming  to a certain extent; however, one can also consider sempre cresc. to be valid until the end of the bar, irrespective of the range of the  mark.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 618

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

​​​​​​​in FE (→GE,EE)

Long accent over L.H. suggested by the editors

, our alternative suggestion

..

Like in bar 618, one can assume that the ​​​​​​​ mark placed under a tied, hence non-played note, was placed inaccurately. We suggest two possible interpretations of the mark:

  • a long accent over the L.H. – the mark would be inaccurately placed in terms of its vertical position (cf. bar 617);
  • diminuendo encompassing the quintuplet in the R.H., assuming an accurate placement in terms of its horizontal position.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Placement of markings , Scope of dynamic hairpins