mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of GE

b. 98

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

Crotchet d3 in A

Quaver d3 in GE (→FE→EE)

Wedge in FED

Dot suggested by the editors
..

The change of the rhythmic value of d3 from a crotchet to a quaver could be considered an inaccuracy of GE (→FE→EE), if it was not for the fact that it harmonises with the change of phrasing, which is proved by corrections of slurs in A. Therefore, Chopin probably changed the slurs in A and left the crotchet by inadvertence (perhaps he planned to maintain the two-voice notation, but he forgot to add a quaver flag). The fact that the rest concerns not only the bottom voice in A but the entire rhythmic sequence was confirmed by the sign written in FED, separating g2-d3 from the f2 semiquaver. In this situation, the purposeful character of the change of the rhythmic notation in GE seems to be very likely and this is the version we adopt in the main text.

In FED, except for the aforementioned separating sign, there is another one, over the discussed g2-d3 fifth, most probably designating staccato. Whether it is a wedge or a carelessly written dot, it is hard to say. In the main text we include this teaching instruction in the form of a dot in brackets.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of GE

b. 98

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

Quavers in A & EE1

Crotchets a & f1 in GE (→FE) & EE2 (→EE3)

4 crotchets alternatively suggested by the editors
..

The stems extending a and f1 on the 1st and 4th crotchets in the bar were added in the proofreading of GE (→FE), most probably by Chopin, since there is no reason to make a mistake. As one cannot exclude that the proofreading was implemented inaccurately, we alternatively suggest extending also the two remaining bass notes.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Authentic corrections of GE

b. 98

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

No c2 in A & GE2

c2 in GE1

c2 tied in FE (→EE)
..

An additional c2 note could have been added by Chopin in the proofreading of GE1 (→FE→EE). The melodic line of the accompaniment, where the second quaver of each pair is higher than the previous dyad or chord, suggests that the note was probably to be sustained, which was then performed in the proofreading of FE (→EE). It cannot be excluded that the additional c2 was printed in GE1 by mistake and left unnecessarily after having added the correct note, a1 (a Terzverschreibung error). The tie of this note, added in the proofreading of FE (→EE) and eliminating its repetition, would be then a "simplified correction," which would happen in Chopin's works, e.g. in the Polonaise in C minor, Op. 40 No. 2, bar 125. GE2 restored the version of A.

In the main text we give the version of FE as intended or accepted by Chopin. The version of A may be considered an equal variant, whereas the version of GE1 is almost certainly erroneous. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of GE , Partial corrections

b. 103-104

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

2 slurs in A

1 slur in GE (→FE→EE)
..

The continuous slur of the editions is a result of the proofreading of slurring performed in GE1. However, the visible traces let us state that the version of A was not corrected; it is also uncertain whether all slurs in GE1 were proofread by Chopin. Due to this reason, in the main text we preserve the notation of A in which the slurs overlap at the beginning of bar 104. The continuous slur may be considered an equal variant.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Authentic corrections of GE

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