mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 44

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

No arpeggio sign in FE (→GE)

Arpeggio sign on 4th beat in EE
..

Nothing suggests the authenticity of the arpeggio in EE, which was most probably added by analogy with the two previous chords.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 45

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

..

In FE, the triplets on the 6th and 7th quavers in the bar open with a d2-c3 seventh. Chopin corrected those patent mistakes in FED; GE and EE also include the correct version. Entries in pencil are present also in FES and FEJ; however, their meaning is not entirely clear. In FES, something resembling note heads was added in pencil around the erroneous notes, yet they rather look like a deletion of c2 than an addition of a b2. In spite of this, since it is difficult to imagine a different aim of additions in this place, we assume that the intention of the person who wrote them, probably Chopin, was to correct the wrong notes. The entry in pencil in FEJ is even less obvious; it looks nothing like the Chopinesque entries – both erroneous notes were put in circles and a quite illegible sign was placed above each of them, perhaps a letter (b?). Therefore, it could mean that the entry was performed by an English-speaking person, hence, e.g. Miss Stirling, who undoubtedly copied the Chopinesque entries from her copies to the copies of Chopin's sister in other pieces.    

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FED , GE revisions , Annotations in FES

b. 46

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

in FE (→EE)

No indication in GE
..

The easiest explanation for the missing  indication is an oversight of the engraver of GE. Less likely scenarios include an intentional omission due to the  in the previous bar and dolciss. in the discussed place or addition of this indication in the last proofreading of FE. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 46-48

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

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

The first finger on b1 in bar 46 and 48 was indicated by Chopin in FES.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 46

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

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fingering in EE

Fingering written into FEH
..

Fontana's fingering added in EE is the most natural continuation of the Chopinesque entry written in FES – see the previous note. An identical fingering is written in FEH, perhaps based on a Chopinesque remark.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FEH