mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Slurs
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Slurs

b. 85-86

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

2 slurs in A

3 slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Different 3 slurs in GE2
..

Two slurs of A, defining the phrasing of these two bars, were replaced in GE1 (→FE→EE) with three slurs dividing the phrase into half- and whole-bar sections, which was only partially corrected in GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 87

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

..

In GE1, particularly in later copies, one can see clear traces of correcting the slurs in the R.H. in the 2nd half of the bar – initially, the slur started (contrary to A) already on the 3rd beat of the bar. Apart from the trace of the original slur, one can also see distortions of the wavy line of the arpeggio, which suggests that the proofreading could have also embraced the upper part of the last chord.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of GE , Corrected slurs of Op. 21 in GE1

b. 88

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

Slur in A & GE2

No slur in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The undoubtedly erroneously overlooked slur in GE1 (→FE→EE) was added in GE2 on the basis of A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 88

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

Slurs & dots in A

Slur in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Slur & dot in GE2
..

Both source versions of slurring are most probably authentic. In the main text, we give separated slurs of A, yet the slur of GE (→FE→EE), being probably a result of the Chopin proofreading and compatible with the slur of analogous bar 20, can be considered an equal variant. We give priority to the version of A, since when proofreading GE1, Chopin would change the misinterpreted slurs in the edition and not the ones he wrote in A.
It is not clear, however, whether the absence of staccato dots was due to an oversight or a correction. In the editors' opinion, the dots were probably overlooked by the engraver, which together with the wrong slurs lead Chopin to write one slur during the proofreading. The GE2 version, although arbitrary, integrates the authentic elements of the notation into a consistent whole, which Chopin would supposedly deem acceptable.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 88-89

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

Slur in A (→GE1→FE→EE)

No slur in GE2
..

In GE1 (→FE→EE), although the slur that started over the last chord in bar 88 was not finished in bar 89 (on a new line), its intended reach is unquestionable and compliant with A. Omission of the slur in GE2, unless it is a simple oversight, must be considered an ineffective revision.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions