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. 335-336

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

No slurs in A & GE2

Slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

Four slurs added in GE1 (→FE→EE) almost certainly do not come from Chopin, which is indicated by their string origin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 336

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

c2 in A & GE2

b1 in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

According to us, the version of GE1 (→FE→EE) is a result of a misunderstanding of the sense of the proofreading in the previous bar. The engraver probably considered the c2 crotchet to be related to the trill and constituting its ending. Since in the proofreading a change of the trilled note was marked, he assumed that the crotchet is also to be corrected.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors resulting from corrections , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 337

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

 &  in A

No markings in GE1

 in FE (literal reading→EE)

 in FE, contextual interpretation

 in both hands &  in GE2
..

In the main text we give the most accurate indications of A. They were overlooked in GE1, probably due to a faulty layout – the Tutti indication, placed between the staves, impeded fitting the remaining ones. While proofreading FE (→EE), Chopin added  at the beginning of the bar, which is to be considered to be rather an ad hoc supplement of the incomplete notation of GE1. According to us, the indication is valid only from the piano reduction of the orchestral part – FE did not observe the differences in the size of the indications between the solo and orchestral parts, whereas dynamic sings would often be placed clearly before the notes they applied to. The version of GE2 is an arbitrary interpretation of the notation of A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 337

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

2 long accents in A

Short accent on 6th quaver of bar in GE

Long accent on 5th quaver in FE

Short accent on 5th quaver in EE
..

The first out of two long accents, written in this bar in A, was overlooked in the editions, probably due to lack of space resulting from the placement of the Tutti indication between the staves in GE1. The second, excluding accidental changes of long accents to short ones and vice versa, was placed in GE (→FE→EE) in the middle between the staves (and not directly over the crotchet in the L.H.) and in FE (→EE), in addition, it was erroneously moved a quaver earlier.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE

b. 339-340

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

No markings in sources

Accents &  suggested by the editors
..

Taking into account a significant similarity of these bars to the previous ones, in the main text we suggest analogous markings.

category imprint: Editorial revisions