|
b. 110
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
Like in the R.H., the fingering digits written in FES pose problems in their interpretation, particularly those concerning e2 (1?) as well as b1 and d2 on the 3rd beat of the bar (4?, 1?). Generally, the fingering of FEH is totally compliant with the indications of FES – possible differences may occur only on the last two semiquavers on the 3rd beat of the bar, for which the interpretation of the entries in FES is questionable. In this situation, in the main text we give fingerings stemming from both copies, creating a coherent whole. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 111-113
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
It is difficult to evaluate the authenticity of the fingering of FEH in bars 111 and 113 – the digits are very similar to the Chopinesque ones, but the fingering differs from the one written by Chopin (in pencil, under Miss Stirling's entry written in ink) in FES. From the pianistic point of view, both fingerings are natural and convenient – in the fingering of FES, the next note, b1, is most probably to be performed with the 5th finger; it may be easier for a smaller hand. The digits added by Fontana in EE define the same fingering that was written in FEH. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 111
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text, we suggest changing pedal on the 4th beat of the bar due to the change of the bass note in the orchestral part (cellos and double-basses) from B to B category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 111
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
Differentiation between the staccato marks in FE (→EE) – a wedge in bar 111 and a dot in bar 113 – could have been intended by Chopin, although being deprived of access to [A], one cannot exclude a mistake in the manuscript's reproduction. Unification of the markings in GE is almost certainly an arbitrary revision; according to us, a possible use of wedges in both bars is much more likely, since young Chopin considered them the basic marking of staccato. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Wedges |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 111
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The uncommonly precise indications in FEH were written by two different persons, which can be explained by the fact that, e.g. a pupil completed the teacher's entry. One digit given by Fontana in EE practically defines the same fingering, perhaps except for the last a1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FEH |
. A minor harmonic blending did not have to be conspicuous on the pianos from Chopin's times. It also cannot be excluded that, while adding the pedalling, the composer did not coordinate the piano part with the orchestral part, particularly since this chromatic sequence in the bass does not appear on the first two occurrences of the theme (bars 19 and 60).
