mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of GE

b. 203-204

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

No slurs in A & GE2

Slur in GE1

Slur in FE (→EE)

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

The absence of the slur (slurs?) separating the solo bassoon phrase in A seems to be Chopin's inadvertence. GE1 has a slur in the 2nd half of bar 204, in which one can see the Chopin proofreading. However, certain arguments show that the addition should be subject to caution – it can be an attempt at an interpretation of the tie of e1, which was not printed in GE1 (it was taken so in GE2, by removing the slur in the 2nd half of the bar and adding a tie). In FE (→EE) the beginning of the slur adopted from GE1 was printed a crotchet too early, which, theoretically, could also come from Chopin, particularly that the fragment of the melody embraced with the slur is to be performed by the R.H., and the slur separates this part from the bottom stave in a certain way (the original layout does not suggest such a division between the hands, since the entire phrase is written on the bottom stave). As the authenticity of the version of the editions is uncertain, in the main text we suggest slurs written in the bassoon part in Morch, close to the authentic phrasing of the motif that was used here (e.g. in bars 41-42).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

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

b. 205

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

No slur in A & GE2

Slur in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The slur, added in GE1 (→FE→EE) may be a result of Chopin's proofreading. However, according to us, an erroneous interpretation of the tie of e1, overlooked in GE1, is more likely.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 213

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

No indication in A

Viol. in GE (→FE→EE)
..

The Viol. indication, added in GE1, may be authentic. Chopin could have had two reasons to specify the instrumentation: the reduction does not include here an important motif of the flute and oboe; moreover, in GE1 the dots and the slur written in A were overlooked. The possibility that the articulation markings were deliberately replaced with this indication seems to be much less likely.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of GE

b. 217

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

..

The cautionary flat before d2 was added in GE (→FE→EE). In a similar context, Chopin would frequently write signs specifying the pitch of a note, compliant with the key, after previously raising it an octave lower. Therefore, it cannot be excluded that the addition comes from the composer.

The flat before the d minim in the L.H. was added by us. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 219

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

Dot in A & GE2

Accent in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The c2 note is provided with a staccato dot in A; however, it was omitted in GE1 (→FE→EE), which is most probably an oversight. In turn, the accent under the note appearing in those editions could have been added by Chopin. However, according to us, in this case it is also a mistake of the engraver that is more likely, since accenting c2 diverts attention from the syncopation opening the next two-bar phrase. Therefore, in the main text we leave the notation of A (restored in GE2). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE