![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Errors in FE
b. 288
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In FE (→EE1→EE2) there is no category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED |
||||||||
b. 297
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
In GE1, the omission of the chord of strings (together with the following rest) written in A may be considered a mistake – as a result of corrections, Chopin moved the notation of the solo part to an adjacent stave, which could have misled the engraver. It is difficult to say why these elements were omitted also in GE2. In this place FE has an erroneous G crotchet (and a rest). It can be a misunderstood proofreading of Chopin, hence we adopt the F crotchet, being harmonically correct, as the text of FE. However, it is highly likely that it was the beginning of the next bar that was printed here. EE omitted the erroneous notation of FE. Contrary to other minor replicas from the orchestral part of this type, the discussed chord, same as the crotchets in the next bar, are only an illustration of the harmonic sequence of the orchestral accompaniment and they are certainly not to be performed, even in the solo performance. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 298
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
There is an erroneous category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 299-300
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The missing category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Errors in FE , No pedal release mark |
||||||||
b. 300
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Disruption of the regularity of the sequence of semiquavers in the version of FE is certainly a result of a mistake of the engraver, who instead of the correct notes repeated two previous ones (f1-b category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Annotations in FED , Terzverschreibung error |