mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of A

b. 108-109

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

b2 repeated in A (→GE)

b2 tied in FE (→EE)
..

The tie of b2, added in the proofreading of FE (→EE), most probably by Chopin, is, according to us, a correction of the oversight of A (→GE) and not a change of the performance's concept. See the note on the L.H.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 108-109

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

c1 repeated in sources

c1 tied suggested by the editors
..

The missing tie of c2 is most probably Chopin's oversight – a corresponding tie is in analogous bars 106-107. See also the note on sustaining b2 in the R.H. as well as bars 107-108. 

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Errors of A

b. 109-110

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

d2-d2  (?) in A, literal reading

d2-d2 in A (contextual interpretation→GE→FE→EE)
..

In both bars there are no accidentals both before the 12th and the 13th semiquavers in A. The flats added in the proofreading of GE (→FE→EE) – almost certainly by Chopin – confirm that we are dealing here with a rare case of a fourfold composer's error, who overlooked both the naturals altering d2 to d2 and flats returning d2. Both necessary naturals were added in EE and the first of them (in bar 109) also in GE2. This kind of mistake may seem implausible, yet in the notation of A, in which the 2nd and 3rd groups of semiquavers are written an octave lower with the use of the octave sign, the error does not seem so striking:

  • the discussed notes are not next to each other, hence a juxtaposition of two identical notes, which do not have accidentals, yet they sound differently, is absent;
  • naturals before d2 seem to be obvious after naturals in both hands in the 1st half of each bar;
  • d2 are sounds of the fixed, current key, F minor, hence the absence of flats is a typical Chopin oversight of cancelling alterations.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in GE , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 110-111

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

f repeated in A (→GE)

f tied in FE (→EE)
..

The missing tie of f is probably an oversight of Chopin in A (→GE). It is indicated by the tie of this note in an analogous situation in the previous bar and it is confirmed by the Chopin proofreading of FE (→EE). After all, who knows whether the slur led under notes, combining the last chord in bar 110 with the first one in 111, is not an echo of the Chopin proofreading too: Chopin, as was his custom, could have written a short tie next to the target note, whereas the engraver of GE1 interpreted it as a motivic slur (see the note in bars 109-110).  

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 117-118

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

..

None of the sources returned b1 in bar 117 and b2 in bar 118, which is a patent oversight. In turn, EE added cautionary flats before the next semiquaver in both bars, b2 and b3 respectively. We include the second of the signs in the main text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE