mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FE

b. 477-478

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt I

B & f tied in FE (→EE)

B & f repeated in GE
..

Simplified notation of FE (→EE), i.e. missing extension of the B semiquaver held with a tie in bar 477, and missing slurs in GE suggest that both extensions could have been added in the last phase of proofreading of FE. Chopin used such a simplified notation on a few occasions, e.g. in the Allegro de Concert, op. 46, bars 162-163. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 477

composition: Op. 11, Concerto in E minor, Mvt III

..

The traces visible in FE demonstrate that the original slur started at the beginning of this bar.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 485

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

c4 & c3 in A (literal reading→GE)

Thirds in A (contextual interpretation) & FE (→EE)
..

The absence of a3 and a2 on the 1st and 4th quavers in the bar in GE must be attributed to an extremely inaccurate notation of A in this respect; according to us, Chopin did write these notes in that place, yet, being in haste, he did not check whether they are visible in the place where the stems overlap with ledger lines. The fact that both notes were added in the proofreading of FE (→EE) dissipates all doubts regarding the composer's intention. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines , Inaccuracies in A

b. 486-487

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

No marks in A (→GE)

Different accents in FE, literal reading

Short accents in EE

Long accents suggested by the editors
..

There is no reason to doubt the authenticity of the accents added in the proofreading of FE (→EE) on c in bar 486 and on C in bar 487. In turn, it is not clear what kind of accents Chopin had in mind, since it is difficult to assume that he would have liked to differentiate between them. According to us, it is long accents that are more likely, since a shift of the shorter sign (in bar 486) may indicate that the accent written by Chopin was longer than the one printed in FE. However, it is only a suspicion, hence both the long accents suggested in the main text and the short accents in EE may be considered equal variants.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 486

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

..

A (→GE1→FE1) features a d2 as the last quaver. At the same time, one can see that initially the entire last triplet was written a second lower – c1-d1-d2. Chopin corrected the first two quavers and most probably overlooked the third one, being in haste. Such a scenario is confirmed by the proofreading of FE2 (→EE) – almost certainly authentic – in which the note was changed to e2. An identical correction was performed in GE2, too.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE