Slurs
|
b. 257-260
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The absence of three out of four slurs under the motifs in the L.H. in A must be considered Chopin's neglect (the slurs are still present in bars 261-262). Therefore, in the main text we include the slurs added in GE (→FE→EE), although it is not absolutely certain whether it was Chopin's proofreading. See also bars 259-260. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||||
|
b. 259-260
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
This and the next slur were added by us. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 260-261
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The very fact of a slur having been added in the proofreading of FE (→EE) by Chopin does not raise doubts, yet its range seems to have been reproduced inaccurately. Therefore, in the main text we suggest a slur led to the beginning of bar 261, after the slur written with Chopin's hand in an analogous motif two bars earlier. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 267
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
A later beginning of the slur in GE1 (→FE→EE) is a typical inaccuracy of the engraver of GE1. The repetition of this inauthentic slur in the L.H. proves that the addition was performed during a revision. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 268
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The traces of division of the slur can be seen also in Morch, in the quintet parts. Perhaps it made the reviser of GE2 introduce a similar change. Slurs over rests are nothing unusual in Chopin's works – cf. e.g. the Mazurka in G minor, Op. 24 No. 1, bars 3, 7 and analog. The addition of slurs for the L.H. in the editions is most probably a revision of GE1 – see bar 267. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
