b. 62
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The notation of accidentals is less careful in this bar. The oversight of the lowering g to g in the group of 9 notes in the L.H. in A is a patent mistake; the sign was already added in GE1 (→GE2,FE→EE). In some of the sources, the missing before the 2nd note in the L.H. on the 4th beat of the bar results from a different convention of accidentals' validity – in A Chopin deleted this sign, considering the before the crotchet on the 3rd beat to be valid. In turn, the absence of flats lowering g1(2) to g1(2) on the 4th beat in A (→GE→FE) is a patent oversight – the fact that Chopin must have heard the g here is supported by the notes' uninterrupted presence from the end of bar 57 and by the use of cautionary naturals before G and g at the beginning of bar 64. It is only EE that includes the fully correct notation, consistent with the contemporary conventions. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Corrections in A , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Last key signature sign |
||||||
b. 62
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
In A (→GE1) there are no digits specifying the number of notes in the irregular group consisting of 8 notes; however, they were added – probably by Chopin – in the proofreading of FE (→EE). In GE2, the entire group was marked with number 11, which, although theoretically possible, seems to be highly unlikely to be intended by Chopin – such a rhythm, quite unnatural and difficult to imagine in a strict way, practically differs very little from the version of FE (the differences in the length of the corresponding notes in both divisions do not exceed 10%). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||
b. 62-63
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
One of the slurs beginning in A on the 4th beat of the bar is probably inaccurate; in spite of the fact that in this section of the recitative not all slurs of the R.H. are repeated in the L.H., it does not seem that Chopin would like to have different slurs in each hand in the same fragment. Taking into account the fact that in a similar situation two bars later Chopin led both slurs to the culminant note at the beginning of the bar, in the main text we suggest extending the slur of the R.H. In the editions the slur of the L.H. was shortened and, moreover, on the 2nd beat of the bar only the demisemiquaver group was embraced with a slur and a similar slur was added in the L.H. If in bar 53 the version with harmonic accompaniment was chosen, one of the versions with a slur only in the R.H. is to be selected here. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
In the main text, we add cautionary naturals before the grace notes. Chopin also used them, but only at the beginning of bar 64. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
We preserve the double flats written in A over the signs, although they are not necessary from the formal point of view. GE1 (→FE→EE) did not include them. In addition, all editions overlooked the wavy lines after the signs and GE1 (→FE→EE) omitted also the very sign in the part of the L.H. (the latter is unseeable in A, in which its presence, however, undoubtedly results from the inserted wavy line and ). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals |