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. 236-240

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

Long accents in A

Long & short accents in GE1

 & different accents in FE

, short & vertical accents in EE

Short accents in GE2
..

All accents in the R.H. in bars 236, 238 and 240 are clearly written and they are undoubtedly long accents. In spite of this, in GE1 the signs in bar 238 were overlooked, whereas the remaining ones were reproduced inaccurately – the last two accents in bar 236 and the last one in bar 240 are short. In FE and EE bar 238 was left without signs, whereas the notation of the remaining ones was distorted – in bar 236 the first accent became a  embracing three (FE) or four (EE) semiquavers, whereas the second one was overlooked; in bar 240, EE used vertical accents. In GE2, all accents of A in these bars were reproduced as short ones.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 236

composition: Op. 19, Bolero

Octave in FE (→EE)

Chord with d1 in GE
..

The version of GE is most probably a mistake – cf. analogous bar 124 as well as 90 and 202. Chopin repeatedly used a similar, characteristic phrase in the Polonaise in E major, op. 22, e.g. in bars 64 and 66 and later also in the Polonaise in F minor, op. 44, bars 29 and 55.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 236

composition: Op. 19, Bolero

Fingering written into FES
 

No teaching fingering
 
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 236-237

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

Continuous slur in A (→GE1, contextual interpretation)

Separate slurs in FE (→EE) & GE2
..

In GE1, the slur in bar 236, at the end of the line, indicates continuation, which, however, is not confirmed by the slur in bar 237. This ambiguous notation was interpreted contrary to the notation of A both in FE (→EE) and GE2. It is worth observing that the compliance of the slur of GE1 in bar 236 with A is a result of intense proofreading – originally, the entire line (bars 232-236) was provided with one-bar slurs. At the same time, the traces of the changes in bars 235-236 became so visible over time that GE1a was reengraved in this place. The oversight of the dashes marking the range of validity of the octave sign at the end of bar 236 was a side effect of this retouch. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , FE revisions , Corrected slurs of Op. 21 in GE1

b. 236-237

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

 in bar 237 in A (→GE→FE)

  in EE

Our variant suggestion
..

In the authentic sources, there is no  sign after  in bar 235. It is probably an oversight, quite frequent at the end of a page (bar 236 is the last one on the page in A). The moment of pedal release was specified in EE, which, however, is almost certainly a routine revision. According to us, a different scenario is also possible: the  sign in bar 237 was written in A by mistake, without taking into account the context of the previous bars, based on the same chord. Performing bars 235-237 with one pedal sounds natural and is compatible with the   signs, improving the ascending and descending shape of the figuration in the R.H. Due to this reason, in the main text we leave the inclusion of pedal change at the beginning of bar 237 to the discretion of the performer.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , No pedal release mark