mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

b. 62

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

..

The notation of accidentals is less careful in this bar. The oversight of the  lowering g to g in the group of 9 notes in the L.H. in A is a patent mistake; the sign was already added in GE1 (→GE2,FE→EE). In some of the sources, the missing  before the 2nd note in the L.H. on the 4th beat of the bar results from a different convention of accidentals' validity – in A Chopin deleted this sign, considering the  before the crotchet on the 3rd beat to be valid. In turn, the absence of flats lowering g1(2) to g1(2) on the 4th beat in A (→GE→FE) is a patent oversight – the fact that Chopin must have heard the g here is supported by the notes' uninterrupted presence from the end of bar 57 and by the use of cautionary naturals before G and g at the beginning of bar 64. It is only EE that includes the fully correct notation, consistent with the contemporary conventions.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Last key signature sign

b. 64-69

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

..

In the final section of the recitative, embracing these bars, Chopin omitted the majority of indications of the irregular groups in A (→GE1) – he only wrote a '7' over the part of the R.H. in bars 65 and 66. In the remaining editions, additions in this respect were performed, and we consider the digits added in FE (→EE) in bar 64 ('12') and 69 ('21') to be authentic. GE2 added all formally necessary markings. We introduce additions also in the main text, apart from brackets in obvious situations (graphically separated triplets and markings omitted in the L.H. only). The only less obvious situation – in bar 64 – is discussed separately.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 64

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

..

FE omits the cautionary  before g.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Cautionary accidentals

b. 65-68

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Slurs only in R.H. in A (→GE1→FE)

Slurs also in L.H. in EE & GE2
..

The slurs in bars 65 and 67-68, which in A (→GE1→FE) are placed only over the R.H., were added in EE and GE2 also in the part of the L.H. We do not include these additions in the main text, since the notation of A does not seem to be incomplete in this fragment (cf. bars 57-61). The slurs in bars 66-67 and 69, added already in GE1, are discussed separately – see bars 66-69.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 65

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Slur from 2nd note in A (→GE1)

Slur from 1st note in FE (→EE) & GE2
..

The moment of beginning the slur over the 2nd half of the bar is unclear both in A and in GE1 – we assume that it starts from the 2nd semiquaver. In the remaining editions, the slur starts from the 1st semiquaver, which can be considered an alternative interpretation of A. In EE and GE2 an analogous slur for the L.H. was added.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions