Issues : GE revisions

b. 178

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

No slur in FE (→EE,GE1GE2)

Slur in GE3

..

In the main text, we add a slur encompassing the characteristic, two-note motif played by violins I. The slur is present in analogous bar 422 as well as in all similar bars – bars 170, 186, 414 and 430. The slur was added also in GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 179

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

..

In FE (→EE), there are no accidentals before the first chord. Therefore, the middle note should be interpreted as d​​​​​​​1. The patent mistake in this context – d1 is present throughout the entire previous bar, while d2(3) is featured in the 2nd half of the discussed bar – was corrected in GE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors repeated in EE

b. 179-181

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

Short slurs in FE (→EE,GE1GE2)

Double slurs in GE3

Long slur suggested by the editors

..

We give a longer slur in the main text, corresponding to the one Chopin added in the R.H., most probably while proofreading FE. GE3 also added that slur; however, the shorter, probably original slurs were preserved.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 181

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

..

In FE, there is no  lowering d​​​​​​​2 to d2. The patent defect was corrected in the remaining editions.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 182

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

Different slurs in FE (→GE1GE2)

Similar slurs in EE & GE3

..

The slurs of FE (→GE1GE2) must be inaccurate, since the slur in the R.H. starts from the quaver, whereas the slur in the L.H. – from the semiquaver. However, it is not obvious which version is correct. A comparison of all analogous bars (bars 174, 182, 190, 204, 418, 426, 434 and 448) shows that it is the slurs starting from semiquavers that statistically prevail – out of 15 slurs (bar 174 is missing a slur in the L.H.) 11 begin in such a way; only 3 run already from the quaver (in bar 174, the slur in the R.H. may be interpreted twofold). Taking into account the above, we give slurs from semiquavers in the main text. It was interpreted in the same way also in EE and GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions