mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors of A

b. 169-170

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

..

The flats restoring e at the beginning of the 2nd half of the bar are missing in both bars in A (→GE). The mistake was corrected in FE (→EE), probably at Chopin's demand. Similarly in analogous bars 319-320.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , Errors in GE , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 198

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

..

In A there is no accidental before the 10th semiquaver. Chopin's patent oversight was corrected already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2), by adding a  restoring b1.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A

b. 202

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

Quavers in A (contextual interpretation)

Dotted rhythm in GE (→FE→EE)
..

The bottom voice in the R.H. is written in A with a rhythmic error: . We assume that Chopin wrote a dot extending the f1 quaver by mistake ("in a flow" after a few other dotted rhythms in bars 201-202); afterwards, he noticed his mistake and left two quavers, expecting that the poorly visible dot would not mislead the engraver. The quavers correspond to the rhythm in the 1st violin part in Morch and they are compatible with a similar motif two bars earlier. The version of the editions, whose compliance with Chopin's intention cannot be entirely excluded, can be considered an alternative to the interpretation adopted in the main text. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Errors of A

b. 220

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

c1-d1 in A (→GE1→FE), literal reading

c1-d1 in EE

c1-d1 in FED

d1-d1 in GE2

c1-d1 in A, probable interpretation
..

The harmonically vague and sonically awkward version of A (→GE1→FE) raised doubts already in EE and GE2, in which the penultimate quaver was changed – by analogy to bar 218 – to c1 (EE) or d1 (GE2). However, it is uncertain whether Chopin meant a strict analogy here, since he did not preserve such an analogy in the part of the R.H. This supposition is confirmed by a correction introduced in FED and this is the version, performed during lessons with Chopin, that we give in the main text. According to us, there is also another possible interpretation of the notation of A, assuming the occurrence of the most frequent Chopin mistakes – an oversight of cancellation of an accidental placed earlier. It leads to the last of the given versions, in which the last two quavers are c1-d1.  

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Annotations in FED , Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A , Accidental below/above the note

b. 230

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

a in A, literal reading

f in A (contextual interpretation) & GE (→FE→EE)
..

The a note written in A (the 11th semiquaver) is most probably Chopin's mistake (the so-called Terzverschreibung error). The note was corrected to f already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2) and it is highly likely that it was performed by Chopin himself.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Terzverschreibung error , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE