|
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The change of forte, written as an entire word, to a standard category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||||
|
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
A has two slurs on the top stave, with the bottom one (on the 2nd beat of the bar) performing only a rhythmic function – it is a part of the sextuplet's marking. In the main text, we omit this slur (a similar action was taken already in GE2). In GE1 (→FE→EE) the slurs deviate considerably from the notation of A. It is either an arbitrary, far reaching attempt at interpreting it or – which seems to be highly unlikely, yet not impossible – a result of Chopin's proofreading. See also the adjacent note. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||||
|
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The group of notes on the 1st beat of the bar was not provided with a digit specifying the number of notes by Chopin. It was added only in GE2, by inserting a '6'. In the main text we recommend a '3', suggesting grouping semiquavers in twos in a clearer manner. If Chopin had heard semiquavers grouped in threes, he could have written the 1st note as a quaver without a dot. However, the discussed situation is far from being unambiguous, particularly given that in the proofreading of FE (→EE) the dot extending the quaver was removed (in the parts of both hands), which could have been performed by Chopin. Taking into consideration the fact that possible differences in performance are practically minimal, we regard each of the versions as acceptable. If in bar 53 the version with harmonic accompaniment was chosen, the second or third version is to be selected here. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||||
|
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The range of the slur written in A in the 2nd half of the bar is uncertain – we assume it is supposed to reach to the next bar. It was interpreted similarly in the editions, in which, however, except for GE2, the beginning of the slur was placed earlier, already over the b category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions |
||||||||||
|
b. 64-72
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
It is puzzling that the changes of the bass note at the end of bar 64 and in the 1st half of bar 65, written in Morch and other sources of the orchestral part, were not considered in the harmonic accompaniment added in FES (see bars 45-52). According to us, it can be a result of inadvertence, hence we suggest a corresponding hypothesis in this place.
After choosing the version with accompaniment, it may be necessary to select corresponding versions also in bar 65 (d-d category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Authentic post-publication changes and variants |
sign is most probably an arbitrary decision of the engraver of 
crotchet. In the editions, another slur was added, for the L.H., which does not seem to be necessary in this layout. In addition, in the part of the L.H. a slur in the 1st half of the bar was added, whereas in 
) and