Issues : Inaccurate slurs in A
|
b. 97
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The starting point of the slur in the L.H. is not entirely clear in A, hence both interpretations – of GE1 (→FE→EE) and GE2 – may be considered justified. In the main text we adopt an interpretation closer to the literal one. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions |
||||||
|
b. 100-101
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
Bar 100 is the last one on the page of A and, as it often happens, the slurs at the transition between the pages are written inaccurately. The slur in bar 100 reaches far beyond the notes, suggesting its continuation, yet in bar 101 there is no possible ending of this slur. Therefore, the versions of the editions in which the slur ends together with the last note in bar 100 may be considered to be justified. However, the logic of the musical course suggests that it is the missing ending of the slur in bar 101 that is inaccurate and not the overextended ending of the slur in bar 100 – cf. e.g. an analogous situations 4 bars further. Starting the slur in bar 101 from the beginning of the bar is a typical inaccuracy of GE1 (→FE→EE), corrected in GE2. (The slur of GE1 bears traces of corrections in print – one can see it was initially divided into a few parts. However, it does not mean that Chopin wanted to move the beginning of the slur – the aim of the proofreading was undoubtedly to combine the illogical fragments.) category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , Corrected slurs of Op. 21 in GE1 |
||||||
|
b. 106-109
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
When interpreted literally, the slurs of A in the ending of bars 106 and 108 do not reach the quavers at the beginning of bars 107 and 109. Both the shape of the signs and the logic of the musical course make it to be an inaccuracy of notation. This is how it was interpreted in GE (→FE→EE), although in the case of bars 106-107 it was most probably a fortunate coincidence – see the previous note. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A |
||||||
|
b. 110-111
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The notation of A is inconclusive on whether the slurs are to be separated between the bars. The slur in bar 110, the last one on the page, reaches beyond the bar line, although it is not clearly visible due to ending ink. A possible continuation of the slur is rather not confirmed by the slur in bar 111, which, although running high over the first semiquavers, suggests with its shape the beginning of a new sign. According to us, both interpretations are equal and in the main text we adopt the solution clearly written in an analogous situation one bar earlier. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A |
||||||
|
b. 110
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I
..
The slur over the first two semiquavers, visible in A, was overlooked in the editions: the engraver of GE1 may have considered it an insignificant, accidental touch of quill. According to us, such a possibility is viable, hence we do not include it in the main text. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A |
