|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The given version of A is already a result of Chopin's corrections, who changed the rhythm and articulation in the 1st half of the bar. Therefore, there is no doubt that the reduction of the number of accents in GE1 (→FE→EE) also came from him. In the main text we give the latest version, changing only the accent, to a long one, much more likely in this context and generally erroneously reproduced in the editions (further changes to the type of accents in FE and EE are probably arbitrary too). GE2 restored the accents removed by Chopin, which points to the use of an autograph at the time of revising GE2 and not the test copy of GE1 with Chopin's proofreading. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Corrections in A , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of GE |
|||||||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Together with the change of accentuation Chopin changed in the proofreading of GE (→FE→EE) also the rhythm: the last crotchet in the 1st half of the bar was sustained and a possible quintuplet of semiquavers was divided into a triplet and a pair of common semiquavers. The change, similarly as in the case of the accents, constitutes the final stage of rhythmic transformations, since the traces of corrections in A prove the existence of an already earlier version. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Corrections in A , Authentic corrections of GE |
|||||||||
|
b. 224-225
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Although the ending of the slur in bar 225 – on a new page – is not written in A, the slur in bar 224 unambiguously points to an intention of leading the slur to the next bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A |
|||||||||
|
b. 224-225
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The change of in tempo to a Tempo in bar 225 in GE is either a routine revision or an inaccuracy. Omission of both indications in FE (→EE1) is undoubtedly an oversight. In EE2 (→EE3) they were added on the basis of comparison with GE1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions |
|||||||||
|
b. 224
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The tie of c1, written in A in accordance with Chopin's habit as a short curved line before the second of the sustained notes, was reproduced accurately in GE1. However, the notation is illegible in print, hence most probably Chopin added a second longer curved line in the proofreading. The notation, which should be clear for anyone who saw A, turned out to be incomprehensible both for the engraver of FE (→EE) and – surprisingly – for the reviser of GE2. As a consequence, despite two ties, the c1 note is not sustained in those editions. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE |
