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
Rhythm
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Rhythm

b. 272

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

..

The middle note of the arpeggiated chord, f1, is a crotchet of the bottom voice in A (→GE). In FE it was assigned to the top one, which shortened its value to a quaver – it is probably a result of Chopin's proofreading. In EE, an extending dot was added to the quaver adopted from FE. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 275

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

Additional crotchet stem to e1 in A & FE (→EE)

No crotchet stem in GE
..

The engraver of GE1 could have considered the extension of e1 to be a mistake or he committed a mistake himself. The stem was restored – most probably at Chopin's request – in FE (→EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 276

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

Quaver c1 in A & FE (→EE)

Crotchet c1 in GE
..

A line pointing down next to ledger lines (most of the time the first bottom one, i.e. c1 or E – see e.g. the last E in bar 280), sometimes appearing in Chopin's autographs, misled here the engraver of GE. The additional stem is already absent in FE (→EE), which could have been, but did not have to, a result of Chopin's proofreading. However, one has to admit that in this case the extension of c1 is quite reasonable, as far as the harmony is concerned. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

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

b. 278

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

4 crotchets in A (→GE)

3 crotchets in FE (→EE)
..

According to us, omission of the additional quaver stem next to f1 is a result of the Chopin proofreading of FE (→EE), which is indicated by possible traces of correction in print in this place (e.g. a slightly bigger note head of the note). Taking into account the fact that in analogous bar 130 f1 is not extended, one can come to a conclusion that Chopin could have written the fourth stem in the discussed bar by mistake.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 281-282

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

..

Similarly as in analogous bars 133-134, Chopin used here a misleading rhythmic notation, in which the d2 minim in bar 281 and the g1 minim in bar 282 are placed over the 2nd quaver in the bar or even after it. In this case, however, bar 282 was written in accordance with the contemporary rules already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2), whereas in bar 281 the misleading notation is only in FE, in which the ambiguous notation of GE1 was erroneously interpreted.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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