mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 223

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

Different accents in A

Short accents in GE & EE

Long accents in FE
..

Same as in the previous bar, A has a long accent on d4 and a short one on c2. The difference was not included in GE, which probably resulted from the intention to simplify the notation. The further changes of the length of accents in FE and EE are also of an accidental nature.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies

b. 224

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

3 accents in A

Short accent in GE1 & EE

Long accent in FE
..

The given version of A is already a result of Chopin's corrections, who changed the rhythm and articulation in the 1st half of the bar. Therefore, there is no doubt that the reduction of the number of accents in GE1 (→FE→EE) also came from him. In the main text we give the latest version, changing only the accent, to a long one, much more likely in this context and generally erroneously reproduced in the editions (further changes to the type of accents in FE and EE are probably arbitrary too). GE2 restored the accents removed by Chopin, which points to the use of an autograph at the time of revising GE2 and not the test copy of GE1 with Chopin's proofreading.

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

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Corrections in A , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 224

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

c1 tied in A (1 tie)

c1 tied in GE1 (2 ties)

c1 repeated in FE (→EE) & GE2
..

The tie of c1, written in A in accordance with Chopin's habit as a short curved line before the second of the sustained notes, was reproduced accurately in GE1. However, the notation is illegible in print, hence most probably Chopin added a second longer curved line in the proofreading. The notation, which should be clear for anyone who saw A, turned out to be incomprehensible both for the engraver of FE (→EE) and – surprisingly – for the reviser of GE2. As a consequence, despite two ties, the c1 note is not sustained in those editions.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

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

b. 226

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

Long accents in A

Short accents in GE (→FE→EE)
..

All accents in the part of the R.H. are clearly long in A, which was not reproduced in GE1 and the remaining editions. We discuss the last one separately due to the differences in its placement.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 233-234

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

Slur from semiquavers in A (→GE)

Slur from chord in FE (→EE)
..

The earlier beginning of the slur in FE (→EE) is an inaccuracy provoked by the beginning of the slur in GE1, probably placed too high.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE