Issues : Authentic corrections of FE
|
b. 397-398
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The engraver of GE1 did not understand the notation of A and omitted both ties of c2. The mistake was corrected in FE (→EE), probably by Chopin. The correct interpretation of A was introduced also in GE2. See also bars 401-403. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||||
|
b. 399-401
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
From the 2nd half of bar 399 on, five subsequent figures in the R.H. are devoid of slurs in GE1 (→GE2). The patent mistake was corrected in GE3. However, according to us, the roots of this mistake could have been found in FE, which is proven by the set of figures devoid of slurs in GE1 (→GE2) overlapping with the set of figures devoid of wedges on the topmost note. Such a compliance of mistakes most often points to their common origin, since committing the same or similar mistakes independently in the same place is highly unlikely. Therefore, most probably both slurs and wedges were overlooked in FE (or even in [A]), which was then corrected, but only with respect to slurs, in the last phase of proofreading of FE (→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||||
|
b. 401-403
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The ties of c2 were reproduced in the editions with errors (similarly as in analogous bars 57-59 and 397-399). In GE1 only the first of them was placed at the right pitch, whereas the second combined the e2 and f2 notes. The ties were further deformed in FE1 – the first one runs from e2 to a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||||
|
b. 404
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
A c3 note added to the chord must be a Chopinesque proofreading of FE (→EE). See also the note in the next bar. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||||||
|
b. 404-406
|
composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III
..
The traces visible in FE prove that each f category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines |
2, whereas the second one was omitted. In addition, 
quaver was provided with an additional crotchet stem in these bars, eventually removed in the proofreading. According to us, it was not the original version, since Chopin would not introduce holds that could not be performed even by a biggest possible hand. The engraver most probably misinterpreted the dashes that Chopin, being in haste, wrote automatically along with noteheads on ledger lines. That impulse was motivated by enhancing the visibility of a notehead slashed with a ledger line; this manner led to misunderstandings on a number of occasions – cf. e.g. the Mazurka in B