Issues : Authentic corrections of GE
|
b. 72-74
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
In A there is no octave sign over the entire sequence of chords written with small notes. The patent mistake was corrected already in GE1 (→GE2,FE→EE), which could have been a result of Chopin's proofreading (however, the correction could have also been implemented by the reviser, since due to the overlapping of the hands, the mistake is evident). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||||
|
b. 75
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
In A Chopin wrote the category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||||
|
b. 76
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The version of the editions may be a result of Chopin's proofreading in GE1 (cf. the 1st mov., bar 87). According to us, it is a mistake of the engraver that is more likely in this situation – a comparison of three analogous bars (bars 8, 27 and 76) suggests that Chopin gradually differentiated the rhythmic aspect, without changing the melodic scheme, in which the g2 note appears only in the end of the bar. The version with the g2 grace note, meanwhile, does not add anything with respect to rhythm; in turn, it interferes with the melodic scheme through the premature appearance of g2. Due to this reason, in the main text we leave the version of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||||
|
b. 77-78
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
In A the slur in the 2nd half of bar 77 does not reach the end of the group of hemidemisemiquavers. It is most probably an inaccuracy; however, it is unknown whether Chopin wanted to lead it only until the end of the bar or lead it further. The slur at the beginning of bar 78 (on a new page of the manuscript) clearly indicates the latter. The solution adopted in the editions may be considered an alternative interpretation of A, particularly since the slur in bar 77 was corrected in GE1, most probably by Chopin. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of GE , Corrected slurs of Op. 21 in GE1 |
||||||||
|
b. 80
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
Omission of the accent in the editions can be considered justified if we take into consideration that, theoretically, it applies to the note that is not played at all, since it is sustained with a tie. From the practical point of view, the trill makes it possible for it to be accented, hence in the main text we suggest the sign in a variant form. It may also be that the missing accent is a result of the engraver's oversight or possibly of an editorial revision. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of GE |
returning d
3 only before the 19th demisemiquaver. The patent mistake was rectified – perhaps by Chopin – in the proofreading of 
