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. 12

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

No slur in A & GE2

Half-bar slur in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Our alternative suggestion
..

The slur could have been added by Chopin in the proofreading of GE1 (→FE→EE), however, even if it was so, it is hard to assume that he wanted to embrace with it only a part of the bass's motif. In the face of doubts concerning the authenticity of both the slur as such and its range, in the main text we do not include this sign. In turn, we suggest a slur embracing the entire sequence of bass in this bar as an acceptable variant. See also the note on  the hairpin. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of GE

b. 12

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

 in A & GE2

No mark in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The missing  hairpin is certainly a mistake of the engraver of GE1, who perhaps omitted the sign, not knowing where to put it (it is practically impossible to convey the notation of A in print). According to us, the following misunderstanding also cannot be excluded: the engraver interpreted the bottom, clearer arm of the hairpin as a slur. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 12-14

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

Dashes up to bar 13 in A & GE2

No dashes in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Dashes up to bar 14 suggested by the editors
..

Omissions of dashes, marking the range of a dynamic (or agogic) change, is a very frequent inaccuracy in first editions of Chopin's works. According to us, Chopin marked the range of the crescendo inaccurately – in A the dashes simply end at the end of the page; such situations would often result in missing endings of such elements of notation as slurs, dynamic hairpins or the very dashes after verbal indications in autographs (and other kinds of sources).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 12-13

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

Slur in A

Slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Slur in GE2

Our alternative suggestion
..

The slur written in A stayed in GE (→FE→EE) next to note heads, which perhaps may have induced Chopin to add a second slur, embracing also the preceding crotchet. According to us, the slur was probably supposed to replace the previous one. A probability of Chopin's proofreading is also indicated by a possible trace of correcting the previous slur in bar 12. However, not being certain of the authorship of these changes, in the main text we leave the version of A.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE , Corrected slurs of Op. 21 in GE1

b. 12

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

..

In A, the original accompaniment on the 4th beat, crossed out but lisible, was like the figure on 3rd beat, shifted a second higher. See also note to bar 13.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Accompaniment changes