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


b. 56

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

..

In A, over the accented cand the initial section of the group of demisemiquavers, there is a visible deletion of the appassionato indication. 

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A

b. 57-61

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

No L.H. slurs in A (→GE1FE)

L.H. slur in bars 60-61 in EE

2 L.H. slurs in GE2

..

In GE2 slurs for the L.H. were added under both phrases of the solo part. In EE a similar addition was introduced in bars 60-61, however, the added slur begins only from the 1st semiquaver (a) in bar 60. (EE also has a fragment of a slur of the L.H. at the end of bar 57, which is the last in line in this edition. We omit this slur, having no continuation and therefore lacking sense.) In the main text, we leave the notation of A, since from this place to the end of the recitative, Chopin wrote only two slurs for the L.H. (in bars 62 and 64), which does not seem to be a result of inadvertence. The additions introduced subsequently in the proofreading of GE1 and FE (bars 62, 63, 64, 66-67 and 69), although perhaps coming from the composer, are of a random nature and their authenticity is uncertain (they could have been a resultant of Chopin's proofreading and editorial revisions).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 58

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

..

In the part of the R.H. one can see in A a correction of the rhythmic notation on the 2nd beat of the bar – the 2nd and 3rd notes of the triplet had a semiquaver beam, whose top line was erased afterwards. The changes most probably spanned the entire 1st half of the bar, originally consisting of a dotted crotchet and two semiquavers, which Chopin skillfully corrected, avoiding, so far as possible, deletions and erasures. 

category imprint: Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A

b. 59-60

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

..

The layout of the chords of the orchestral part reduction in A (→GE) corresponds to the division into instrument groups and not to piano reality – four voices on the top stave are grouped in twos, with an indication of flutes and clarinets performing them, whereas the bass voice, imitating the double-bass part (an octave higher) is written as a third voice on the bottom stave. It was changed in a proofreading of FE (→EE), most probably by Chopin, to a layout indicating the pianist a division into hands, which we adopt in the main text.  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 59-60

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

2 slurs in A

No slurs in GE1 (→FEEE)

3 slurs in GE2

2 slurs suggested by the editors

..

The missing slurs are most probably a mistake of the engraver of GE1 (→FEEE). In the main text, we suggest slurs modelled on the slurs of A, yet adapted to the changed division of chords into voices (the change was performed in FE (→EE), most probably by Chopin). GE2 repeated the slurs of A, adding another one, for the bottom pair of dyads on the top stave. 

If in bar 53 the version with harmonic accompaniment was chosen, the last of the given versions is to be selected here.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions