mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors resulting from corrections

b. 20

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

 in Atut

 in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

 in GE3

 suggested by the editors
..

According to us, Chopin changed the initially written  to  in Atut, probably with an intention of leaving place for a subsequent crescendo. However, the correction turned out to be incomprehensible for the engraver of FE (→GE,EE), who preserved . Like in bar 16, the mark in Atut is written between the chords, which, according to us, does not mean that it should be applied from the 3rd beat of the bar, like it was reproduced in the majority of the editions.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 31

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

No sign in Atut (literal reading→FE→GE,EE)

 in Atut, contextual interpretation
..

In Atut, the R.H. part is written in this bar twice, most probably due to the non-inclusion of the bottom voice on the 3rd beat of the bar for the 1st time. In the corrected version, Chopin, however, overlooked the  mark, which was not included in the same FE (→GE,EE). According to us, it is highly unlikely that it was an omission – the composer forgot about the mark, since he was focused on those elements that required improvements, e.g. beams of the quavers in the melodic line.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 39

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

 in Atut

No marking in FE (→GE,EE)
..

 at the beginning of the bar was written in Atut in place of the previous . The absence of a marking in FE (→GE,EE) means that the engraver of FE probably did not understand this correction, considering the  mark written in bold font to be a deletion of . In the main text, we preserve the version of Atut, in which Chopin reviewed and corrected the dynamic markings – cf. e.g. bar 20 and 32. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in FE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 60-61

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

Slur to bar 61 in Atut

Slur in bar 60 in FE (→GE)

2 slurs in bar 60 in EE
..

The slur in Atut reaches the E1-E octave and it was extended to that end. However, after having written the 1st half of bar 61, Chopin deleted the octave to change the manner of notation of the R.H. part. The discussed slur was not crossed, but in rewritten bar 61, the ending of the slur was not repeated, which explains its shorter range in the editions. A separate slur for the top notes of the octaves added in EE must be an editorial revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 134

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

a on first beat in Atut

a on 3rd beat in FE (→GE,EE)

a on 1st & 3rd beat suggested by the editors
..

In Atut, one can see traces of corrections (erasures), as a result of which some places were spilled with ink, so that it is unclear what is actually written on the top stave. However, since the clearly visible elements perfectly correspond to the orchestral part of FEorch (→GEorch), it is this version that we adopt as the text of Atut. In turn, the text of the editions, clearly different, does not bear traces of corrections in print in FE, which, however, does not mean that there were none – adding an element, e.g. a note, did not have to leave any trace. According to us, the following scenario is likely, among other things – the engraver of FE overlooked the dotted a minim on the bottom stave, which was corrected by Chopin, who added an a crotchet on the 3rd beat of the bar. Both source versions can be considered intended by Chopin. Then again, taking into account the probably most reliable elements of both versions – playing a on the 1st and 3rd beats of the bar, in the main text we suggest a version including both.   

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in FE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , Authentic corrections of FE