|
b. 265
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
FE (→EE1) overlooked the category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 267
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
FE (→EE,GE1→GE2) is missing the category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 267
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
In the main text, we suggest adding a slur after the identical slur in bar 265. The slur was added already in EE and GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 268-269
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 269-270
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
Both fingerings appearing in the sources are compliant in terms of the 5-4-5 succession of fingers at the top of the passage, typical of Chopin. In the descending part of the passage, FEH gives a crossing-over of the 5th finger, which also belongs to the range of Chopinesque fingering options – cf. the Impromptu in A category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FEH |
restoring e1. The accidental, most probably overlooked by Chopin, cf. bar 267, was added in 
1 to g1. Chopin's oversight is proven by the 
Major, Op. 29,