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
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 174

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

..

The naturals before fourths, opening each of the group of semiquavers, are written in A (→GE1→FE) only in the 1st and 4th groups. EE and GE2 include the correct text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 174

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

..

In A (→GE1→FE) there is no  before F1. The sign was added in EE, whereas in GE2 sharps were added before both notes of the octave.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 174

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

Four-note chord in A

Three-note chord in GE (→FE→EE)
..

The absence of the c1 note in the editions is certainly a result of an oversight of the engraver of GE1. Although in A the note is slightly less clear than e1, its presence is unquestionable. In similar contexts, Chopin would generally use an arpeggio of the full four-note chord, cf. e.g. the Concerto in E minor, Op. 11, 1st mov., bars 210, 219 and 570, the Ballade in G minor, Op. 23, bar 124, the Scherzo in B minor, Op. 31, bar 470.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Uncertain notes on ledger lines

b. 174

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

 under chord in A

2  in GE (→FE→EE)
..

The first of two  in GE1 (→FE→EE) could have been added by Chopin, yet, according to us, a mistake of the engraver is more likely; after the erroneously printed  sign at the beginning of the bar, he could have added another one under the chord (having noticed a mistake or performing proofreading), yet he did not delete the first sign. This type of unfinished proofreading, where the erroneously printed element remains in the notation in spite of adding the correct sign, would occur in Chopin's pieces on a number of occasions, e.g. in the Polonais in B major, WN 17, bar 65. In similar motifs, composed of the bass and a longer resounding chord of a syncopated nature, the accent appears much more often on the chord only than on both elements, cf. e.g. the Rondo in E major, Op. 16, bar 37 or Bolero, Op. 19, bar 134, as well as three last examples mentioned in the adjacent note. Therefore, we consider the version of the editions a variant of dubious authenticity and we give A as the main text. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Partial corrections

b. 174

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

Dot & long accent in A

No marks in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Dot & short accent in GE2
..

The missing staccato dot over the F quaver and long accent after  are almost certainly oversights of the engraver of GE1. Both signs were added in GE2, although the characteristic Chopin  combination was not reproduced in accordance with the notation of A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions