|
b. 30
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The missing accent is most probably an oversight of the engraver of GE. In the main text, we suggest a long accent, since the shorter mark in FE is most probably related to its atypical placement between two top elements of the chord. Generally, it is impossible to reproduce such a notation, sometimes used by Chopin, e.g. in the Concerto in F minor, op. 21, the 2nd mov., bar 36, in print accurately. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents , Errors in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 31
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The missing category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 34
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
An arbitrary change of horizontal accents to vertical ones is one of the characteristic manners of the engravers or revisers of EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 34
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
The staccato dot present in GE is most probably an inaccuracy of the engraver of that edition. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Wedges |
||||||||
|
b. 35-36
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt II
..
In FE, three subsequent accents under the dotted quavers, although they look like short ones, are of a slightly different length, related to the length of the beam above them. It may indicate that the engraver considered them to be diminuendoes ( category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Editorial revisions issues: Long accents |
in 
), which, in turn, points to the use of long accents by Chopin. Cf. similar motifs in the 1st mov. of the Concerto, bars 4-6.