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
Pitch
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Pitch

b. 25

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

E1-G1-E-G in A, literal reading

G1-B1-E-G in A (probable interpretation) & GE2

G1-E-G in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The chord written in A, although acceptable from the harmonic point of view, is almost certainly erroneous due to its sonically unjustified piano complication. However, it remains unclear which chord Chopin meant:

  • G1-B1-E-G seems to be most natural: an octave transposition of chords is a popular means of the virtuoso concert texture (cf., e.g. the 3rd mov., bar 69 or 511-513). We would then be dealing with Chopin's typical Terzverschreibung error. This is how it was interpreted in GE2 and we suggest this interpretation as the text of A;
  • G1-E-G – a lighter chord due to a very low register (cf. the 3rd mov., bar 77). In this case it is also a Terzverschreibung error that would have to be taken into consideration: Chopin could have written the correct chord and then consider the bottom note to be a B1 and "correct" the alleged mistake, by adding a note placed a third below (the top bottom note seems to have been added later). Such a scenario assumes, however, that two mistakes were committed: an erroneous evaluation of the pitch of the written note and the fact of leaving it, in spite of the fact it was supposed to be removed (cf. the Etude in G major, Op. 10 No. 5, bars 83-84).

In any case, the proofreading of GE1 (→FE→EE), probably coming from Chopin, must be considered to be the final decision and this is the version we give in the main text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE , Partial corrections

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. 28

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

e2 in A (→GE)

c2 in FE (→EE)
..

The less pianistically convenient c2 instead of e2 is almost certainly a Terzverschreibung error of the engraver of FE (→EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Terzverschreibung error

b. 28

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

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  before a3.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 29

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

..

This time (cf. bar 10) the flat overlooked by Chopin in A was added already in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A