mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 300-304

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

Wedges & dots in A

Dots in GE1 (→FE)

Dots in both hands in EE & GE2

Wedges suggested by the editors
..

The double articulation markings for the first crotchets in bars 300, 302 and 304 present in A are probably an element of an earlier concept – cf. bar 294. Due to this reason, it is only the wedges that we include in the main text. The dots in the L.H. are also absent in GE1 (→FE), although it does not seem to be a result of the proofreading. Replacing wedges with dots in GE (→FE→EE) stems from the business-as-usual approach of the engraver of GE1, and perhaps also haste.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 301-302

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

Whole-bar slur in A (→GE1→FE)

Whole-bar slurs in both hands in EE

Motivic slurs in both hands in GE2

R.H. motivic slur suggested by the editors
..

The slur of A (→GE1→FE) is probably the original version – in analogous bars 295 and 297 Chopin extended similar slurs. The slurs in the L.H. added in EE and GE2 are inauthentic. Cf. bars 303-304 as well as 297-298.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 303-304

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

Whole-bar slur in A

Motivic slur in GE1 (→FE)

Motivic slurs in both hands in EE & GE2
..

The slur of A is probably the original version – cf. bars 301-302. Therefore, the longer slur in GE (→FE→EE) may be a result of Chopin's proofreading.
The slurs in the L.H. added in EE and GE2 are inauthentic – see bars 297-298.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 303

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

No sign in A (→GE→FE)

 in EE
..

The  hairpin must be an arbitrary addition of the reviser of EE who tried to unify the notation of all identical bars in this fragment.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 305-306

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

..

In A there is not any  raising e2(3,4) to e2(3,4). It is almost certainly Chopin's mistake – if he were to hear e in this place, he would have used a cautionary flat in this context. The composer also omitted the naturals raising d1(2) to d1(2), which clearly proves that the figures (whose sound, written after so many repetitions, he regarded as obvious) were written hastily and inaccurately. Anyway, the naturals (e2, d2 and e4) added in the proofreading of GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2) and uncontested by the composer both in FE and FED clearly prove his intention. In EE, naturals were added also next to d1 and d4, whereas in GE2 – next to e3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE