Issues : Placement of markings
|
b. 115-118
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
One can doubt whether the slurs of FE (→EE) faithfully convey Chopin's intention – above all, it is the combination of two three-note motifs in bars 116-117 that is puzzling; the absence of slurs in bar 117 (and 115) may also be considered an inaccuracy. Those objections are confirmed by the explicit notation of FEorch (→GEorch), in which all the aforementioned motifs are consistently separated with slurs in both parts of violins. It is perhaps on that basis that GE1 (→GE2) separated the slur in bars 116-117. According to us, it is also highly likely that the Chopinesque slurs – regardless of their number and range – were written over the notes, since the main melodic line is constituted by the topmost notes of the chords. Moving indications – slurs, dots, accents – to the side of noteheads, which was considered the right placement, was frequently used in Chopinesque editions. Therefore, in the main text we give the slurs of FE moved to above the stave; we give the slurs of GE1 (→GE2) – also moved – as an alternative suggestion. The version of GE3, which drastically changes the text of FE (→GE1→GE2), is totally arbitrary. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Placement of markings , GE revisions |
||||||||||||
|
b. 391
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
Moving the slur under the stave was certainly caused by graphic issues. The absence of the slur in GE3 can be explained by an oversight or revision. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Placement of markings , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
