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
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 456

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

Short accent in A & GE2

Long accent in GE1

 in FE (→EE)
..

The short accent in A was reproduced in GE1 as a long one, since the engravers were probably convinced that they were a diminuendo hairpin. This is how it was interpreted in FE (→EE), extending the mark to the end of the triplet, "for clarity." The form of the sign compliant with A was restored in GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 458-459

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

Wedges in A

Dot in GE (→FE→EE)
..

In A both c3-f3 fourths were provided with wedges, which, however, may be problematic at the time of interpreting them. The mark in bar 458 looks like a dot, whereas the one in bar 459 like a crotchet stem of the top note pointing upwards. This is how they were interpreted in GE1 (→FE→EE), as a result of which there is no staccato mark in bar 459. In GE2, the dot was preserved in bar 458, yet no staccato mark was added in bar 459, in spite of removing the unnecessary division of the fourth into voices.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE , Wedges

b. 478

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

Shorter  in A

Longer  in GE (→FE→EE)
..

Extending the  hairpin to the end of the bar, like it was done in the editions, seems to be justified by the general direction of the passages and by analogy to the mark in bar 476, led in such a way in A. However, in the main text we reproduced the notation of A, which, not excluding the climax of the passage at the beginning of the next bar, may also suggest a more pronounced accentuation of the 3rd beat of the bar as including the locally topmost note (in bars 478-479). See also bar 480.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 480

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

Shorter  in A

Longer  in GE (→FE→EE)
..

In the main text we preserve the notation of A, which may suggest a more pronounced accentuation of the 3rd beat of the bar as the topmost point of the passage. Cf. bar 478.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE

b. 485-486

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

 &  in A, literal reading

 & > in A, contextual interpretation

 & > in GE1

 & > in FE

 &  in EE

 in GE2
..

According to us, the virtuoso panache and brilliance require rather accents than diminuendos, hence in the main text we interpret all marks of A as accents (long and short). The  marks printed in GE (→FE→EE), even longer than in the notation of A, hinder the interpretation of a possible intention of the composer even more. Shift of the accent at the end of bar 485 must be an inaccuracy of the engravers of GE1 and FE1.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE , EE inaccuracies