mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 27-28

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

Slur c2-g2 in A (literal reading→GE1→FE→EE)

Slur c2-a2 in A (contextual interpretation) & GE2

Slur d2-a2 (other interpretation of A)
..

Same as in bars 23-25, the range of the slur written in A is unclear. Under the slur there is only a group of semiquavers; however, the beginning of the slur clearly suggests that it should be started from the c2 minim. In turn, the need to lead the slur until the very next bar is indicated by the slurs of the next two similar figures as well as the slur of Morch (the 1st violin part).

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 28

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

Slur c2-b2 in A (literal reading) & GE2

Slur d2-b2 in A, contextual interpretation

Slur c2-a2 in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The starting point of the slur is unclear in A. According to us, it is more likely that it was supposed to run from the d2 crotchet, yet the interpretation adopted in GE2 is also possible. An earlier ending of the slur in the remaining editions must be considered an inaccuracy.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions

b. 31-35

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

3 slurs in A, contextual interpretation

4 slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE)

3 slurs in GE2
..

The slurring of A is inaccurate at the transition between the pages: the slur at the end of the page (bar 32) suggests a continuation, yet there is not any ending on a new page (bar 33). To make matters worse, the next slur, beginning from the syncopated b1 note, is written with great flourish, which probably convinced the engraver of GE1 (→FE→EE) that the division of the slur appears here on the bar line. Nevertheless, there is no excuse for distortions of phrasing in bars 31-32 and 33-34. As a whole, the fragment is one of the most striking examples of misunderstanding and disregard of the Chopin slurring by the engraver of GE1. It is worth adding that the last slur was led to the end of the phrase in bar 35 only in the proofreading: initially, bars 31-34 contained four one-bar slurs.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , Corrected slurs of Op. 21 in GE1

b. 40

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

Slur to e2 in A (→GE)

Slur to e​2 in FE (→EE)
..

In the main text, we give the ending of the slur after FE (→EE) due to a possibility of Chopin's proofreading. The text of A (→GE) may be considered an equal variant.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 51-52

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

Slur in A

Slur in GE

Slur in FE (→EE)

Slur suggested by the editors
..

According to us, all source versions of the slurring of the motif beginning in bar 51 are inaccurate. The bar is the last on the page in A, which would often contribute to inaccuracies in the notation of slurs (cf. e.g. bars 31-35). Nothing indicates that moving the beginning of the slur in GE1 and FE could have been a result of Chopin's proofreading: the first does not influence the meaning of the sign, while the result of the second is a slur contrary to the authentic articulation and dynamic markings (staccato on the 1st chord in the bar and   ). Therefore, in the main text we suggest a slur that is present in all sources in an analogous situation in the next bar.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A