mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

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. 227-228

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

Slur in A, literal reading

Half-bar slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Two-bar slur in GE2

Interpretation of slur in A suggested by the editors
..

The slur in the L.H. reaches in A only the end of bar 227 (or the beginning of the next one), which may be explained by incompletion (Chopin forgot to end the slur) or abandonment (Chopin resigned from ending the slur in the face of the slur in the R.H.). The second possibility is supported by the fact that until bar 240 no other passage in the L.H. has a separate slur. In this situation, can we consider the slurs of GE1 (→FE→EE) to be inspired by Chopin? In the proofreading, the composer might have added one slur implemented by the engraver as four half-bar slurs, with which he facilitated his work. In this situation, in the main text we suggest extending the slur of A to the beginning of bar 229, in accordance with the most likely interpretation of the slur of the R.H.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions

b. 227-228

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

..

The notation of accidentals in this passage is very inaccurate in A, particularly in the part of the R.H., in which only the 1st half of bar 228 includes all necessary signs. Luckily, it does not impede the correct interpretation of the text. In the editions the signs were gradually added, but only GE2 and EE3 have the fully correct text. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Inaccuracies in A

b. 228-229

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

End of slur in A, contextual interpretation

End of slur in GE (→FE→EE)
..

The slur of A at the end of bar 228 clearly indicates a continuation to bar 229. Therefore, this is the version we adopt in the main text, although in bar 229 (on a new page) there is no ending of the slur.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 228

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

Pedalling in A & GE2

Pedalling in GE1 (→FE)

Pedalling in EE
..

The placement of the  signs is not entirely clear in A, which could have caused later inaccuracies in the editions. We assume that they concern the 3rd semiquaver in each half of the bar, which is not contrary to the notation and it is also justified as far as the sound is concerned. Among the first editions, only GE2 has such a pedalling. The version of GE1 (→FE) is inaccurate, whereas the one of EE – arbitrarily changed.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in A

b. 229

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

No slur in A (→GE→FE)

Slur in EE

Slur suggested by the editors
..

Taking into account the authentic slur in analogous bar 225, one can consider that the missing slur in this bar should be added – this was probably the reasoning of the reviser of EE. On the other hand, it cannot be excluded that Chopin consciously resigned from writing separate slurs for the L.H. in similar figurations – cf. the note in bar 227. In the main text we suggest a slur for the L.H. mainly due to a necessary, according to us, addition of the slur in bars 231-232. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions