mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 205

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

Slurs in FE (→GE1→GE2)

Slurs in EE

Slurs in GE3
..

In the 1st half of the bar, FE (→GE1→GE2) has different slurs for the R.H. and for the L.H. We unify them in the main text by changing the slur in the L.H. after the slur in the R.H.; a similar change was introduced in EE. In GE3, the slurs were changed in the parts of both hands, assimilating the slurring of this bar to analogous bar 449. According to us, this solution, generally totally arbitrary, may be considered a justified attempt at reconstructing Chopin's intention, assuming it was inaccurately reproduced by FE (after all, it is quite likely that it was already in [A] that the slurs were being written hastily and inaccurately).  

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 207

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

No slur in FE

Slur in GE & EE
..

In FE, the missing slur is most probably an oversight related to the introduction of bass clef to the notation of f​​​​​​​. Anyway, it must be an inaccuracy, which was corrected already in GE and EE.
Distraction of the engraver of FE is proved also by the missing initial fragment of the next slur – it is only its ending in bar 208, on a new line, that was printed. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 208-209

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

 in FE (→EE)

 in bar 209 in GE1 (→GE2)

Shifted  in GE3
..

A later beginning of the ​​​​​​​ mark in GE1 (→GE2) must be an inaccuracy resulting from having divided these bars into two great staves. GE3 prolonged the mark yet did not repeat its range from FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies

b. 208-209

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

Fingering written into FEH

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fontana's fingering in EE
..

The fingerings of FEH and EE differ essentially. What is more, in bar 208, FEH initially contained the same fingering as in EE; however, it was then changed to a regular scheme, conveniently synchronised with the accents. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH

b. 211

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

..

In FE (→EE1), there is no  lowering d​​​​​​​2 to d2. The accidental was added in GE and EE2 (→EE3).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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