mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in GE

b. 12

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

Two-quaver slur in A

Four-quaver slur in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Three-quaver slur in GE2
..

The two-quaver slur of A is most probably inaccurate (cf. similar figures in, e.g., the previous bars). Therefore, in the main text we give a longer slur, corresponding to the slurring of analogous figures. A similar solution was adopted in GE2. The half-bar slur of the remaining editions is certainly an arbitrary decision of the engraver of GE1.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 14-15

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

Slur 7 quavers in A & GE2

Slur 8 quavers in GE1

Slur 9 quavers in FE

No slur in EE
..

The slur of A undoubtedly begins from the 2nd quaver of the bar, hence the fact that it starts earlier in GE1 (→FE) is most probably a mistake. On the other hand, it is uncertain which note the slur of A is supposed to reach. A comparison with two analogous situations (bars 33 and 82) as well as separation of bass notes through articulation performed by Chopin in the entire movement tip the scales in favour of the slur ending together with the last chord in the bar. The interpretation adopted in the main text is present also in GE2. In GE1 the slur in bar 14 ends in a similar manner, yet in bar 15 one can see traces of deletion of the slur reaching the 1st quaver. It explains leading the slur from bars 14 until the beginning of bar 15 in FE.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

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

b. 15

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

Slur in A & GE2

3 slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

In GE1 bar 15 opens a new page, which contributed to an inaccuracy in reproducing the slur in the R.H.: the slur running from the previous bar has no continuation on the new page. We interpret it in accordance with the way it was interpreted in FE (→EE). It is only in GE2 that the slur is compatible with the notation of A (although from the practical point of view, a sequence of slurs present in the remaining editions is only a strange manner of writing the same execution).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 15

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

Crotchet e in A & GE2

Quaver e in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The notation of A may raise certain doubts here: the line combining both a seems to be a tie, which, however, would require the first a to be a crotchet. Chopin may have resigned from a precise notation, since he wanted to avoid deletions or excessive complications: . The notation of A was repeated without changes in all editions (this kind of simplified notation can be found in other pieces by Chopin, in the Polonaise in C minor, Op. 40 No. 2, bars 82 and 109 or in Allegro de Concert, Op. 46, bars 162 and 163).

Omission of the stem extending e on the 4th quaver is most probably an inaccuracy of the engraver of GE1 (→FE→EE). In GE2 the stem was restored, yet the inaccuracies of notation described above (in spite of introducing a few other arbitrary changes) were not removed.    

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 17

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

Arpeggio sign in A

Slur in GE (→FE→EE)
..

A vertical slur written in A before the c2-c3 octave designates an arpeggio: it is just a simplified form of the standard wavy line, cf. e.g. the last chord in the 3rd movement, bar 484. In that period of Chopin's life the simplification process had just begun, hence a misunderstanding of this notation on the part of engravers is understandable. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE