mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 111

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

No fingering in A (→GE)

'1' in FE (→EE)
..

Chopin added the one on the last quaver in the proofreading of FE (→EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 111

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

2  in A (literal reading→GE1)

2  in A (contextual interpretation) & EE2 (→EE3)

No markings in FE (→EE1)

One  in GE2
..

When interpreted literally, both  are written in A in a way it was performed in GE1. However, according to us, the second sign concerns the quaver motif in the L.H. and this is the interpretation we give in the main text. It is difficult to state why FE (→EE1) did not print any of those signs; it was probably due to distraction. In GE2 the second sign was considered superfluous and it was removed. In this context, one has to acknowledge the intuition of the reviser of EE2 (→EE3) who found the correct solution only on the basis of GE1, hence not having seen A.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions

b. 111

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

..

The  raising d2 to d2, overlooked by Chopin in A, was added in GE (→FE→EE).  

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals

b. 111-113

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

Fingering written into FEH

Fingering written into FES, bar 113

Fingering based on FES, bar 111

No fingering in FE (→GE)

Fingering in EE
..

It is difficult to evaluate the authenticity of the fingering of FEH in bars 111 and 113 – the digits are very similar to the Chopinesque ones, but the fingering differs from the one written by Chopin (in pencil, under Miss Stirling's entry written in ink) in FES. From the pianistic point of view, both fingerings are natural and convenient – in the fingering of FES, the next note, b1, is most probably to be performed with the 5th finger; it may be easier for a smaller hand. The digits added by Fontana in EE define the same fingering that was written in FEH.
In the main text, we give the fingering written in FES the first time the passage appears, i.e. in bar 111 – cf. the General Editorial Principles, p. 17.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Differences in fingering , Annotations in FES , Annotations in FEH

b. 111

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

No pedal change in sources

Pedalling suggested by the editors
..

In the main text, we suggest changing pedal on the 4th beat of the bar due to the change of the bass note in the orchestral part (cellos and double-basses) from B to B. A minor harmonic blending did not have to be conspicuous on the pianos from Chopin's times. It also cannot be excluded that, while adding the pedalling, the composer did not coordinate the piano part with the orchestral part, particularly since this chromatic sequence in the bass does not appear on the first two occurrences of the theme (bars 19 and 60).

category imprint: Editorial revisions