mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 253-254

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

1 slur in A & GE2

2 slurs in GE1 (possible interpretation→FE→EE)
..

The inaccurate, ambiguous notation of GE1 – the slur in bar 253, the last one in line, indicates a continuation, yet it is not confirmed by the beginning of the slur in bar 254 – was interpreted in FE (→EE) as separated slurs.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 255

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

 from 1st third in A

 in GE1

 in FE (→EE)

 in GE2
..

All minor differences in the range of this sign appearing in the editions are certainly of random nature. In this case, the sign certainly means a "very long" accent, hence shifts both in GE1 and GE2 distorted its sense.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 271-272

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

Slur in A

Slurs in GE1

Slurs in FE

Slurs in EE

Slurs in GE2
..

Over the part of the R.H. (in some editions under), apart from the top, several-bar-long slur, the sources include one or two additional slurs of varied range. According to us, it is most probably only the slur of A that is authentic, hence we give it in the main text. The absence of visible traces of corrections of slurs in GE1 makes a possible Chopin proofreading highly unlikely, whereas the subsequent minor changes of the range of the first slur, of inaccurate (FE) or revisional (EE and GE2) nature and actually without impact on the performance, cannot be authentic.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 281-282

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

..

Similarly as in analogous bars 133-134, Chopin used here a misleading rhythmic notation, in which the d2 minim in bar 281 and the g1 minim in bar 282 are placed over the 2nd quaver in the bar or even after it. In this case, however, bar 282 was written in accordance with the contemporary rules already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2), whereas in bar 281 the misleading notation is only in FE, in which the ambiguous notation of GE1 was erroneously interpreted.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 290-291

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

Beginning of slur in A (contextual interpretation), EE & GE2

Beginning of slur in A (possible interpretation)

Beginning of slur in GE1 (→FE)
..

The beginning of the 2nd slur in this bar is unclear. The slur of A is certainly inaccurate in this respect – we assume that Chopin wanted to embrace the entire group of small notes with it, as in analogous bar 142. GE1 interpreted it in a similar way, yet the inaccurately placed slur included also the e1 crotchet (which was corrected in GE2). FE generally reproduced the version of GE1; however, the different layout of the slurs coinciding on the e1 crotchet contributed to the fact that EE interpreted it already as the beginning of the slur from the 1st small semiquaver.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions