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. 381-385

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

No slur in A (→GE1→FE)

Slur to bar 384 in EE

Slur to bar 385 in GE2
..

The slurs in the L.H., added in EE and GE2 and being a repetition of a respective slur in the R.H., were certainly performed by the revisers. However, their compliance with Chopin's intention is not entirely excluded – see bars 376-377 and 384-385 as well as 385-387 and 387-388.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 383

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

..

Same as in analogous bar 39, in the main text we omit the cautionary flats before d1(2) present in the sources.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Cautionary accidentals , Last key signature sign

b. 384-385

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

Slurs in A

Slurs in GE

Slurs in FE (→EE)
..

In the main text we give the slurs of A, which do not raise any doubts concerning both the sources and music. However, the version of GE may be considered at least to be equal:

  • an inaccuracy consisting in engraving a slur incompatible with the division into bars or groups is something practically unusual in GE1, which, in spite of the lack of visible traces of corrections, makes Chopin's proofreading highly likely. The proofreading of the slurs can also be indicated by the slurring of FE (→EE), perhaps reproducing the state of GE1 from before the last phase of proofreading;
  • Chopin wrote such a system of slurs in analogous bars 40-41.

The arguments for the adoption of the notation of A are as follows:

  • a legible, unequivocal notation;
  • no dynamic markings in these bars, emphasising the beginning of the ascending passage – cf.   in bars 40-41. A shorter slur of A suggests that a new thought begins in bar 385, which compensates this deficiency to a certain extent.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 385

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

Wedge in A

Dot in GE

No mark in FE (→EE)
..

The clear wedge written in A was reproduced in GE as a dot. In FE the sign is copied so inaccurately that it cannot be considered a staccato dot; this explains its absence in EE. A possible removal of the dot in FE by Chopin, which could have left such a trace, should be excluded, according to us.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Wedges

b. 385-387

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

No marks in A (→GE1→FE→EE)

Staccato dots in GE2
..

In GE2, staccato dots in the part of the L.H. were added at the beginning of bars 385 and 387 together with the slurs. See also bars 387-388.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions