Slurs
|
b. 241
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The slur of A, clearly led to the 5th quaver, was shortened in GE (→FE→EE), perhaps due to a graphical difficulty or misunderstanding of the crossed lines of the slur and the category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 246-247
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
GE (→FE→EE) treated the slur in the parts of both hands in the same way, which is not compliant with the notation of A. According to us, there are also no musical reasons to suspect an inaccuracy of the notation of A, hence we give it directly in the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
||||||||
|
b. 246
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The slightly too short 1st slur of GE1 caused an already more distinct inaccuracy in FE. The remaining editions include a text compatible with A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 247-248
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Shortening the slur in the editions is certainly a result of inaccuracy of the engraver of GE1. In turn, in the case of the addition of a slur for the L.H., Chopin's proofreading cannot be entirely excluded. In GE2 both slurs were preserved, extending both in accordance with the notation of the slur in the R.H. in A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 248
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
A later beginning of the slur in GE1 is an evident inaccuracy (the engraver made his work easier by avoiding an atypical slur). A slur compliant with the course of music was introduced both in FE (→EE) and GE2. The correction in FE could have been ordered by Chopin, but it remains uncertain. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
hairpin.
1 in