|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text we include the slur for the L.H. added in a proofreading of GE – cf. an analogous slur in A in bars 91-92 – even though it is not entirely certain whether it was added by Chopin. The undoubtedly erroneously shortened slur in the R.H. in FE made the reviser of EE perform a similar change in the part of the L.H. The mistake of FE was corrected with an entry in FED, performed in pencil. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED , Authentic corrections of GE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The absence of a dynamic indication is most probably an oversight of the engraver of FE. The addition of category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Annotations in FES , Authentic post-publication changes and variants |
|||||||||||
|
b. 1-22
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In GE the entire first Tutti is written in a font of a normal size, clearly against the notation of A and generally applied rules of publication of solo versions of works with orchestra. Therefore, we consider it a patent mistake, which we reproduce only in the version "transcription." One can wonder why nobody paid attention to it when preparing GE2, generally carefully revised on the basis of A. FE (→EE) did not repeat this error, which seems to be an editorial decision, perhaps consulted with Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , FE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 1-3
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Upon seeing the slur of A led over the part of the L.H., impossible to reproduce in print in this form, the engraver of GE1 (→FE→EE) divided it into three parts to make it easier. According to us, the bottom slur is an addition by Chopin, who added a slur confirming the will expressed in A to embrace the part of the L.H. with one slur. In this context, it does not seem that Chopin would care about double slurs – the divided top slurs were most probably left in order to avoid an excessively complicated proofreading; it could have been a decision of the engraver or of Chopin. The added slur, although it is generally compliant with the slur of A, is, however, longer. Both versions make sense since the slur of A, led over the part of the L.H., reaches a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Change of the time signature from category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , 4/4 or 2/2 , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE |
in 
indication written in 
, which is then repeated, while the slur of 
to 
is one of the most characteristic inaccuracies of first editions of Chopin's works – see e.g. the Sonata in B