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. 146-147

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

Fingering written into FED

No teaching fingering
..

The fingering added in FED comes most probably from Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED

b. 146

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

 in A

cresc. in GE (→FE→EE)

cresc. in FED
..

The change of the  sign, written in A, to cresc. appearing in GE (→FE→EE) seems to be Chopin's correction. However, it cannot be excluded that the change was performed arbitrarily by the engraver of GE1, seeing that there is no place for such a long sign – over the notes it is the  sign from the last bar that is an obstacle and between the staves it is the number 18, the slur and the  in the part of the L.H. What is more, cresc. printed in FED was deleted and written closer to the end of the bar, which can be considered a confirmation of the inauthenticity of the change performed in GE1. However, due to the lack of conclusive arguments against the authenticity of the changes performed in the sources with a confirmed participation of Chopin – GE1 and FED – we consider all three source versions to be authentic and in the main text we give the latest, i.e. FED. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 146

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

..

In A (→GE→FE) there is no  raising d2 to d2. The patent inaccuracy was corrected in EE, adding also a cautionary  before c2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Omission of current key accidentals , Inaccuracies in A

b. 146

composition: Op. 19, Bolero

 

a2 in GE & EE3
..

It is unclear how the difference between the variants of FE (→EE1→EE2) and GE occurred – there are no visible traces of corrections in both sources. Due to stylistic reasons, a possibility that Chopin replaced b2 present in FE with a2 seems to be less likely. The introduction of a2 mitigates – in the climax of the progression – both the melodic tension (fifth instead of sixth) and harmonic one (abandonment of dissonance). In turn, the reviser of EE3 undoubtedly wanted to change the note to a2, yet the engraver overlooked the  raising a2. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 146-148

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

2 slurs in A & GE2

Slur from b1 in GE1

Slur from e1 in FE (→EE)
..

Combining the slur beginning in bar 146 with the next one is a patent mistake of GE1 (→FE→EE). It is one of many examples of flagrant ignorance of the notation of A, since the slurs in the manuscript are unambiguous. The correct slurs were restored in GE2. In FE (→EE), the mistake of GE1 was complemented with an inaccurate beginning of the slur in bar 146, which, next to the oversight of a staccato sign in this bar, completely distorted the vision of phrasing of the beginning of this bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions