mUltimate Chopin

Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

b. 469-470

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

No slur in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

Slur over triplet in GE3

Longer slur suggested by the editors
..

Just like in bar 462, the missing slur must be an oversight; the slur was added only in GE3. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 471

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

Dot in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

Wedge in GE3
..

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 474-475

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

​​​​​​​ in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

​​​​​​​ in GE3
..

The significantly shorter  hairpin with respect to analogous bars 472-473, musically unjustified, suggests an inaccuracy of notation. The reason for a later beginning of the mark could have been, e.g. lack of space in [A] – if FE had faithfully reproduced the layout of the autograph, Chopin would have had less space under the L.H. part in the discussed bars due to all stems pointing downwards. In turn, an earlier ending could have been related to the semiquavers passing to the upper stave (both elements of the layout were not taken into account in our transcriptions). Therefore, in the main text we give a ​​​​​​​ mark analogous to the one in bars 472-473. A similar change was introduced in GE3.  

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 475

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

No mark in FE (→EE,GE1→GE2)

Short accent in GE3

Long accent suggested by the editors
..

The missing accent does not have to be considered an oversight in this case – cf. the twin phrases of this three-part progression (bars 473 and 477). Therefore, in the main text we suggest a long accent in accordance with the interpretation adopted in the mentioned bars. An accent (short) was added in GE3.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , GE revisions

b. 478

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

Slur over triplet in FE (→EE)

Slur from e4 in GE1 (→GE2)

No slur in GE3

Slur suggested by the editors
..

It is difficult to assume that Chopin would have liked to embrace with a slur only one triplet in this bar. The notation of [A] was most probably unclear (e.g. due to crossings-out) or a misunderstanding occurred at the time of proofreading. The slur of GE1 (→GE2) is most probably an erroneously shifted slur of FE, while its omission in GE3 was probably meant to eliminate the clearly erroneous mark. According to us, the presence of the slur in FE proves that Chopin did not intend to introduce subtler articulation effects; therefore, in the main text we prolong the slur of FE so that it encompasses the entire passage. An additional argument supporting the validity of such a solution are numerous examples of prolonged slurs in the proofreading of FE, e.g. in bar 493 or 496.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions