mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Partial corrections

b. 98

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

No c2 in A & GE2

c2 in GE1

c2 tied in FE (→EE)
..

An additional c2 note could have been added by Chopin in the proofreading of GE1 (→FE→EE). The melodic line of the accompaniment, where the second quaver of each pair is higher than the previous dyad or chord, suggests that the note was probably to be sustained, which was then performed in the proofreading of FE (→EE). It cannot be excluded that the additional c2 was printed in GE1 by mistake and left unnecessarily after having added the correct note, a1 (a Terzverschreibung error). The tie of this note, added in the proofreading of FE (→EE) and eliminating its repetition, would be then a "simplified correction," which would happen in Chopin's works, e.g. in the Polonaise in C minor, Op. 40 No. 2, bar 125. GE2 restored the version of A.

In the main text we give the version of FE as intended or accepted by Chopin. The version of A may be considered an equal variant, whereas the version of GE1 is almost certainly erroneous. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of GE , Partial corrections

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. 185

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

Long accent under L.H. in A

Accents on 2nd & 3rd R.H. quaver in GE1 (→FE)

Accents on 1st & 3rd R.H. quaver in EE

Short L.H. accent in GE2
..

In the main text we give the notation of A, the only authentic according to us. The versions of editions are a sequence of cumulative mistakes, inaccuracies, misinterpretations and arbitrary changes:

  • the most plausible explanation of the additional accent in GE1 is an unfinished proofreading – the erroneously printed accent on the 3rd quaver was left in spite of adding the correct sign on the 2nd quaver (see also the note on rhythm in this place). Moreover, both signs were printed too high, so that they seem to apply rather to the R.H., contrary to Chopin's intention, who wrote the accent in A under the crotchet in the L.H.;
  • in FE both accents already clearly apply to the R.H.; the first one was placed inaccurately, between the 1st and 2nd quavers;
  • EE added its portion of inaccuracies and arbitrary decisions, as a result of which, instead of the long accent on the 2nd quaver in the L.H., as it is in A, the edition gives two vertical accents, over the 1st and 3rd quavers in the R.H.;

GE2 generally restored the notation of A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Partial corrections

b. 346

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

..

In GE1 the semiquaver opening the characteristic main motif of this movement of the Concerto, recalled here, is A-f. This patent mistake, corrected both in FE (→EE) and in GE2, is probably a result of an unfinished proofreading of A, erroneously printed in this place – the correct note was added, yet the erroneous one was not removed. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Partial corrections