Issues : Terzverschreibung error
b. 20
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The version of GE1 is certainly erroneous: it is most probably a revised Terzverschreibung error, by adding a . Chopin restored the chord with c2, written in A, in a proofreading of FE (→EE). At the time of executing this proofreading, a superfluous was moved together with the note head. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |
|||||||||||
b. 25
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
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:
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
..
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
..
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. 81
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt II
..
The roulade ending this bar has two basic versions in the sources:
The second was undoubtedly introduced on Chopin's request, however, its notation raises certain doubts – the g2 note added in the proofreading is preceded with a (cautionary?), being totally unjustified in this context (e.g. both in analogous bars 13 and 32 and in the discussed bar the top most note of this figure, g3, is written without a ). Therefore, one could wonder whether a Terzverschreibung error could have been committed here and whether the intended note could have been an e2, which naturally develops the melodic line of this figure after the e1 semiquaver. We suggest this possibility as an alternative interpretation of the Chopin proofreading of FE. Differences in the notation of the rhythm of the figure's ending – see the last note in this bar – cause that two slightly differing rhythmic schemes can be ascribed to each of the versions of the roulade discussed above. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations issues: Terzverschreibung error , Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE |