mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in GE

b. 131-132

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

Slur continued in A

New slur in GE (→FE→EE)
..

Same as in the previous bars, dividing the slur of A into two parts was an arbitrary decision of GE (→FE→EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Tenuto slurs

b. 131-132

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

poco ri - te - nu - to in A

poco riten. in GE (→FE→EE)
..

We reproduce the poco ritenuto indication after A, in which Chopin suggested the range of the retardation (probably to the e2 minim). The editions used the standard notation.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 132

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

Slur break after e1 in A & GE2

Slur break before e1 in GE1

Contiguous slurs in FE (→EE)
..

Even in such a seemingly obvious situation, the engraver of GE1 separated the slurs in the middle of the bar, contrary to A and the musical sense. The extension of the first slur in FE (→EE), although it returns the range of the slur written in A, is probably another inaccuracy.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 133

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

Long accent on d2 in A

Short accent on d2 in GE

Short accent on a1 in FE

Vertical accent on a1 in EE
..

Differences in the placement of accents perhaps result from an ambiguous rhythmic notation, adopted from A – the engraver of FE, seeing an accent over the d2 minim, which, although placed over the d1 crotchet, is to be performed together with a1, placed the accent in the place of its validity (at the beginning of the bar). At the same time, he did not take into account the fact that having moved the sign over another note in fact changed its meaning, since in the quasi-polyphonic texture the sign generally concerns only one of the voices. In the main text we give the version of A.   

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 135

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

Crotchet b1 in A & GE2

Quaver b1  in GE1

Dotted quaver b1 in FE (→EE)
..

Assigning the b1 crotchet to the top voice, which made a quaver of it, is, according to us, a result of inaccuracy of the engraver of GE1 who either did not understand the notation of A or made his work easier. Adding an extending dot next to the note in FE (→EE) may be an ad hoc correction of an alleged oversight of the dot in the version of GE1. Therefore, in the main text we preserve the version of A as the only undoubtedly authentic. Theoretically, both in the case of the change in GE1 and FE, one cannot entirely exclude a possibility of Chopin's proofreading, yet it seems to be highly unlikely that he would like to change such a minor detail of accompaniment – the difference in the sound with a natural harmonic pedalling is practically imperceptible. GE2 returned the version of A. Similarly in an analogous place in the recapitulation, bar 283.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , FE revisions