mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

b. 22

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

2 long accents in A

Long & short accent in GE1

2 short accents in FE & GE2

3 vertical accents in EE
..

Contrary to the notation of A, accents in GE1 are of a varied length. The signs in FE are not equivalent, yet the difference seems to be unimportant; we interpret them as short (short accents are also in GE2). All those differences are undoubtedly of an accidental character. In EE both signs were reproduced as vertical accents and such an accent was added over the chord on the 4th beat of the bar. Cf. notes on accents in the R.H. in this and next bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE

b. 22

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

Short accent in A (→GE→FE)

Vertical accent in EE
..

In EE the accent was changed to a vertical one, same as all other accents in this and next bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 23

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

Long accents in A

No marks in GE1 (→FE→EE)

Short accents in GE2
..

It is difficult to say what the motivation of the engraver of GE1 (→FE→EE) was while he overlooked four very distinct long accents of A. He may have considered them to be superfluous in the face of the accents of the R.H. In GE2 the accents were reproduced as short.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 23

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

Long accents in GE1

Short accents in FE & GE2

Vertical accents in EE
..

Three accents in A are of a different length: the first can be safely assumed to be long, yet the classification of the next two is unclear. We assume that they are long accents, since there are no musical reasons for them to be equal (actually, they are much bigger than the accent in the R.H. in the previous bar). This is how they were interpreted in GE1, which, however, was not reproduced both in FE and GE2. EE used vertical accents, which is quite a frequent revision in that edition.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 26-27

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

Pedalling in A

Pedalling in GE1

Pedalling in FE (→EE)

Pedalling in GE2
..

In the main text we give the pedalling of A, since the authenticity of the addition introduced in GE1 (→FE→EE) is uncertain. The doubts are raised by an inaccurate alignment of indications in this bar, the absence of the  sign in the previous one and a clumsy arrangement of the 1st beat of the bar. If, e.g. a sequence of  signs at the transition between bars 26 and 27 was originally printed as a whole in bar 27 (considering the 2nd quaver to be the beginning of the bar), Chopin could have added only the most sonically striking mistake, which was the omission of the  sign at the beginning of bar 27.
The version of FE, despite being apparently closer to the notation of A than GE1, was most probably forced by the dense arrangement of the text. In GE2 the additional change of pedal was removed, however, the placement of the previous signs was not adjusted.  

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions