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

Pitch

b. 226

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

Long accents in A

Short accents in GE (→FE→EE)
..

All accents in the part of the R.H. are clearly long in A, which was not reproduced in GE1 and the remaining editions. We discuss the last one separately due to the differences in its placement.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

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

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. 229

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

..

The sources include a cautionary  before d2 in the 3rd group of semiquavers. Interestingly, a respective cautionary sign (before a2) in analogous bar 225 is missing, where it would be justified.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Cautionary accidentals

b. 230

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

a in A, literal reading

f in A (contextual interpretation) & GE (→FE→EE)
..

The a note written in A (the 11th semiquaver) is most probably Chopin's mistake (the so-called Terzverschreibung error). The note was corrected to f already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2) and it is highly likely that it was performed by Chopin himself.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Terzverschreibung error , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 230

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

f in A (→GE) & EE

a in FE
..

One can see Chopin's proofreading in the version of FE, since a as the penultimate note reasonably combines with the 1st chord in the next bar. However, the argument brought forward in the note concerning the previous figure suggests a Terzverschreibung error, which is more likely, according to us. It was considered a mistake already in EE, in which a was changed to f.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of FE