Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 361
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The missing third accent is almost certainly an oversight – cf. bars 363 and 371. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 363
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The omitted accents must be a mistake of GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||
b. 364
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
According to us, a hairpin in the next bar and pairs of marks in similar, two-bar passages in bars 356-357, 358-359 and 366-367 prove a highly likely oversight of the mark in this bar. Therefore, in the main text we suggest a mark after analogous bar 356. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 365
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The range of the hairpin in FE (→EE) is questionable – it is disproportionately short to the descending part of the passage, which lasts the entire bar. A possible reason for that inaccuracy could be lack of space under the low-placed beam of the 3rd triplet in [A]. In the main text, we suggest a mark modelled after the more carefully marked passage in bars 356-357. The absence of the mark in GE is most probably attributable to an oversight. category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins |
||||||
b. 369
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The accents present in three similar bars – bars 361, 363 and 371 – make us consider the absence of respective marks in the discussed bar to be Chopin's oversight. At the same time, the presence of long accents in bars 368 and 371 suggests that Chopin could have envisioned long accents for the R.H. in the entire four-bar section (differently than in bars 360-363). category imprint: Editorial revisions issues: Long accents |