mUltimate Chopin

Select:

Category

Notation

Importance

Undo Clear

« Previous
1
…
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
…
114
Next »

b. 403

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

In the main text, we add a cautionary before e².

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Editorial revisions

Show

in transcript in source compare sources

b. 404-405

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

4 staccato dots in FE (→GE1→GE2)

6 dots in EE

4 dots in bars 404-405 in GE3

Although not all uneven quavers in FE (→GE1→GE2) are provided with staccato dots (the marks are absent in the 1st half of bar 404 and in the 2nd half of bar 405), there is no doubt that the defects are to be attributed to Chopin's or the engraver's inaccuracies. EE added dots, while GE3 removed the dot in bar 404 and added one in bar 405.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

Show

in transcript in source compare sources

b. 404-406

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

No marks in FE (→GE,EE)

Staccato dots suggested by the editors

The absence of staccato dots under the f quavers certainly does not mean that their articulation changes with respect to the previous two bars. Either Chopin considered the previous four dots to be enough, considering the homogenous texture, or he or the engraver forgot about those markings. Yet another possibility is discussed in the adjacent note. In order to avoid doubts, we add dots in the main text.

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Editorial revisions

Show

in transcript in source compare sources

b. 404-406

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

The traces visible in FE prove that each f quaver was provided with an additional crotchet stem in these bars, eventually removed in the proofreading. According to us, it was not the original version, since Chopin would not introduce holds that could not be performed even by a biggest possible hand. The engraver most probably misinterpreted the dashes that Chopin, being in haste, wrote automatically along with noteheads on ledger lines. That impulse was motivated by enhancing the visibility of a notehead slashed with a ledger line; this manner led to misunderstandings on a number of occasions – cf. e.g. the Mazurka in B Minor, Op. 24 No. 4, bar 23 or the Etude in F Major, Op. 10 No. 8, bars 4-7. The misunderstanding in the discussed bars could have influenced the engraver's decision to ignore possible staccato markings under those notes – he could have considered the simultaneous prolongation and shortening of those notes to be irrational; hence, bearing in mind the seven-time prolongation of f in bars 393-401, he opted for stems.