|
b. 227-228
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The slur in the L.H. reaches in A only the end of bar 227 (or the beginning of the next one), which may be explained by incompletion (Chopin forgot to end the slur) or abandonment (Chopin resigned from ending the slur in the face of the slur in the R.H.). The second possibility is supported by the fact that until bar 240 no other passage in the L.H. has a separate slur. In this situation, can we consider the slurs of GE1 (→FE→EE) to be inspired by Chopin? In the proofreading, the composer might have added one slur implemented by the engraver as four half-bar slurs, with which he facilitated his work. In this situation, in the main text we suggest extending the slur of A to the beginning of bar 229, in accordance with the most likely interpretation of the slur of the R.H. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 227-228
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The notation of accidentals in this passage is very inaccurate in A, particularly in the part of the R.H., in which only the 1st half of bar 228 includes all necessary signs. Luckily, it does not impede the correct interpretation of the text. In the editions the signs were gradually added, but only GE2 and EE3 have the fully correct text. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Inaccuracies in A |
|||||||||||
|
b. 227
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
Chopin wrote four cautionary flats in A – three at the beginning of the bar and a fourth one before d category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , FE revisions , Last key signature sign |
|||||||||||
|
b. 227
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I
..
In FE, it was initially f category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 227
|
composition: Op. 16, Rondo in E♭ major
..
In FE, there are no accidentals whatsoever in this bar. It is undoubtedly an error commited possibly by Chopin in [A] – cf. Etude in F minor, op. 25 no. 2, bar 56. Accidentals were added in both GE and EE: category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals |
3. The signs were repeated in 
that was the third quaver. It was most probably a Terzverschreibung mistake, corrected in print.
before the lower note of the third on the 2nd quaver, thus confirming a