mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of GE

b. 28

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

4 grace notes in A

3 grace notes in GE (→FE→EE)
..

In a proofreading of GE (→FE→EE) Chopin removed the second out of four small semiquavers written in A, most probably, however, it was an erroneously engraved a1. In spite of the fact that Chopin's intention of removing the correct note (f1) was not explicitly expressed in this situation, a reduced number of notes in this ornament remains a fact. Due to this reason, in the main text we give the version of the editions.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 29-31

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

Slurs from 2. quaver in A & GE2

Slurs from 1. quaver in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The slurs in A begin from the 2nd quaver of each half-bar figure (only the slur in bar 31 may raise doubts). It is unclear how the change of their range occurred in GE1 (→FE→EE): in the case of a few of them one may assume extension of slurs in print (adding slurs in the 2nd half of bar 31 was a patent intervention). Not being certain whether the changes were performed in consultation with Chopin, in the main text we preserve the slurring of A (restored in GE2).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 31

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

No slurs in A & GE2

Slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The slurs in GE1 (→FE→EE) could have been added by Chopin. However, taking into account the fact that some of additions of slurs in GE1 are questionable, as far as Chopin's participation in their addition is concerned, in the main text we consistently leave the version of A (cf. bars 29-31).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of GE

b. 41

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

b1 in A, FE (→EE) & GE2

b1 in GE1 & FED
..

The changes in the pitch of the 2nd note in particular sources seem to prove Chopin's hesitation; the order of the versions is as follows: b1 in A, b1 in GE1, b1 returned in a proofreading of FE (→EE), most probably by Chopin, and b1 written in FED (the version of GE2 is most probably a result of a revision on the basis of A). Chopin's hesitation seems to touch the basic structure of the phrase here: melodically, the beginning of the bar is related to the previous figure, containing a b1, harmonically, it inclines towards the next chord (on the 4th crotchet of bar 41), containing a b1. A melodic solution equal to the version with b1 was used by Chopin against a similar chord in the Mazurka in A minor, Dbop. 42B, bar 52. However, one has to point out that although the authenticity of the version with b1 is unquestionable (A and a proofreading of FE), the first appearance of the version with b1 could be ascribed to a mistake (revision?) of GE while the interpretation of an entry in FED as an added  is not entirely certain. Due to this reason, in the main text we give b1. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Chopin's hesitations , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 42-44

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

Slurring in A, contextual interpretation

Another interpretation of A

Slurring in GE1

Slurring in FE

Slurring in EE

Slurring in GE2

Slurring suggested by the editors
..

The slurring of the R.H. in A is inaccurate and unclear:

  • it is unknown whether the 2nd slur in bar 42 concerns the demisemiquavers of the solo part or the crotchets of the orchestral part; it cannot be excluded that according to Chopin it performed a double role; in any case, the slur seems to be too short;
  • it is unclear whether the slur at the beginning of bar 44 is only a mistake or whether it signalises an idea of extending the slur in the previous bar; we consider the latter to be more likely.

The slurs of A in bar 42 were overlooked in GE1 (→FE→EE); however, in EE parallel slurs on the last beat of the bar were added (it is most probably an editorial revision). In turn, the slur over the demisemiquavers in bar 43 could have been added in GE by Chopin; its beginning is certainly inaccurate, which was corrected in FE (→EE) and GE2. We include the slur, in the version of FE, in the main text, being, apart from that, an interpretation of the slurs of A.
The slur of FE at the beginning of bar 44 is probably erroneous. The slurring of GE2 is a result of an arbitrary reinterpretation of the notation of A.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , Corrections in A , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE , FE revisions