Issues : EE revisions
b. 182
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The slurs of FE (→GE1→GE2) must be inaccurate, since the slur in the R.H. starts from the quaver, whereas the slur in the L.H. – from the semiquaver. However, it is not obvious which version is correct. A comparison of all analogous bars (bars 174, 182, 190, 204, 418, 426, 434 and 448) shows that it is the slurs starting from semiquavers that statistically prevail – out of 15 slurs (bar 174 is missing a slur in the L.H.) 11 begin in such a way; only 3 run already from the quaver (in bar 174, the slur in the R.H. may be interpreted twofold). Taking into account the above, we give slurs from semiquavers in the main text. It was interpreted in the same way also in EE and GE3. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
b. 187
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The version of FE (→EE1) is doubly incomplete:
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||||||||||
b. 192
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The missing slur in the R.H. is a patent mistake of FE, corrected in the remaining editions. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
b. 196
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
There are three natural ways to add the rhythmic value in which the notation of FE is lacking; we give them as potentially compliant with Chopin's intention. Two of them were implemented already in the first editions. In the main text, we give the rhythm adopted in GE, which, according to us, is most likely due to the calming of the course of music (rallentando in the next bar) and due to the presence of that very rhythm in an analogous context in bar 440. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||
b. 197-198
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The notation without mark was probably present already in [A], since an analogous place in bars 441-442 is written in the same manner. Therefore, it is a particular case of omission of , used by Chopin at the end of a piece – after all, the solo part ends (temporarily) in bar 198. In this situation, it seems to be natural to hold the pedal to the end of bar 198 like it was indicated in EE and GE3, or a quaver longer, which may be suggested by the notation of the L.H. in bars 442-443. Since the cumulative notation of the solo part and of the piano reduction of the orchestral part causes the authentic notation – without – to be misleading, in the main text we suggest to add that mark in a way to leave the exact moment of the pedal's release to the discretion of the performer. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , No pedal release mark |