mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Annotations in FES

b. 49

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

Fingering written into FES

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fingering in EE
..

Chopin's poorly legible entry in FES most probably indicates the use of the 4th finger on d2. The digits added by Fontana in EE mark the same fingering.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 50

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

Fingering written into FES & FEH

No teaching fingering
..

The compliance between the fingering in FES and FEH contributes to the authenticity of the entry in the latter. Therefore, it allows for considering the fingering added in the next bar, continuing the discussed entry, to be authentic.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH

b. 56

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

g2 repeated in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

g2 tied in FES & GE3
..

The tie of g2 added in FES proves that its absence in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2) is most probably an oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 58

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

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering

Fingering from FES in FEH variant
..

The Chopinesque fingering written in FES – the 1st finger on b1 – may be, according to us, used also to perform the extended version of the roulade written in FEH. When choosing this version, one has to use the third of the given variants due to a different layout of the text. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 59

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

Slur (tenuto?) in FE

No slur/tie in GE

Tie to c3 in EE

Arpeggio written into FES, possible reading

Repeated c3 in FEH, literal reading
..

The meaning of the curved line between the c3 notes is unclear, particularly in FE where it does not reach the quaver. Chopin may have thought of a tenuto-slur; however, a different misunderstanding of the Chopinesque notation also cannot be excluded. In the main text, we omit this curved line, since, according to us, the prescriptive interpretation of the mark as a tie is erroneous.

The passage filling 5 quavers was added in FES on the margin, next to the line containing bars 59-62, without indicating the place it should be inserted in the printed text. According to us, there are two such places – the 1st half of bar 59 (as an A major passage) or 5 last quavers in bar 61 (as an A minor passage). The latter seems to be more likely due to a similar nature of the passage written in this bar in FEH, hence we adopt the variant placed in bar 61 as the text of FES.

The literal interpretation of the variant of FEH excludes a simultaneous application of the interpretation of the passage of FES discussed above. Another interpretation of the entry in FEH – see the note in the further part of this bar.    

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Authentic post-publication changes and variants , Annotations in FEH