mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Rhythm
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Rhythm

b. 127

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

4 crotchets in A & GE2

2 crotchets in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The engraver of GE1 may have considered the extensions of the 2nd and 4th quavers to be a mistake – cf. bar 125. However, this kind of notation, more or less precisely marking the so-called harmonic legato – holding elements of chords with fingers – would often be used by Chopin, e.g. in bars 130 and 278. In analogous bar 275, the notation of the editions is also inaccurate.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 127

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

..

In A one can see that the roulade had initially only 14 notes, since the c2 note was inserted later. Strictly speaking, Chopin remade the original c2 to a  and added one note (c2) to the left-hand side and a second (c2) to the right-hand side. He also changed the marking of the number of notes in the group from 14 to 15.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A

b. 133-134

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

..

The notation of the rhythm in the sources is misleading, since the d2 minim in bar 133 and the g1 minim in bar 134 are placed over the 2nd quaver in the bar or even after it. Chopin would often use this earlier notational convention, generally in the case of notes filling an entire bar. It is particularly the beginning of bar 133 that raises doubts, in which, at first sight, it seems that after the a1 crotchet one should play the d1-d2 octave. Chopin's addition in FED – a dash combining a1 with d2 – confirms that the text was misinterpreted here by the pupil. Similar ambiguities are present in analogous bars 281-282.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , GE revisions

b. 135

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

Crotchet b1 in A & GE2

Quaver b1  in GE1

Dotted quaver b1 in FE (→EE)
..

Assigning the b1 crotchet to the top voice, which made a quaver of it, is, according to us, a result of inaccuracy of the engraver of GE1 who either did not understand the notation of A or made his work easier. Adding an extending dot next to the note in FE (→EE) may be an ad hoc correction of an alleged oversight of the dot in the version of GE1. Therefore, in the main text we preserve the version of A as the only undoubtedly authentic. Theoretically, both in the case of the change in GE1 and FE, one cannot entirely exclude a possibility of Chopin's proofreading, yet it seems to be highly unlikely that he would like to change such a minor detail of accompaniment – the difference in the sound with a natural harmonic pedalling is practically imperceptible. GE2 returned the version of A. Similarly in an analogous place in the recapitulation, bar 283.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , FE revisions

b. 135

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

Crotchet e in A (→GE)

Dotted minim in FE (→EE)
..

Extending the value of e is undoubtedly a result of the Chopin proofreading of FE (→EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE