Issues : EE revisions
|
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In FE the bottom note of the 1st crotchet is an erroneous f1 instead of a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 6
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The dot over c3, present in GE1 (→FE→EE), could have been added by Chopin. According to us, however, an inaccuracy of the engraver is more likely; therefore, in the main text we adhere to the version of A. In GE2 the additional dot was omitted, whereas in EE3 two dots more were added to four dots of EE2, hence all quavers in this bar are provided with dots (probably by analogy with bar 330). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The first two fingering digits missing in this bar is certainly an oversight of FE (→EE1). The digits were added in EE2 (→EE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 29-32
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The notation of accents in A is clear and unambiguous – four long accents on the 3rd beat of each of the bars. In spite of this, the editions did not faithfully reproduce both the placement and the length of the signs. All changes in GE1 and FE are undoubtedly of an accidental nature, which, with a tightly packed text, leads to confusion and impedes the interpretation and reproduction of their notation. Sometimes, the accents start so close to category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||||||||||
|
b. 35-41
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
In the main text we suggest adding the slur in the L.H. – slurs in the L.H. are present both before and after this phrase, hence a missing slur could suggest a difference in performance between the right and left hand, which certainly was not Chopin's intention. When the phrase returns in bars 379-385, the slur in the L.H. is also absent, but in this case, Chopin consistently gave slurs only in the R.H. in the entire fragment in unison (bars 377-388). A similar addition was introduced already in EE as well as in GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
1 – cf. analogous bar 329 as well as similar situations in bars 11, 13, 27, 29 and analog., which always include a
& different accents in 
that it seems that both signs constitute a pair, accenting one strike together (Chopin would often use such combinations, but in this case 
pairs to be applying to the 2nd beat; the kind of employed accents is unobvious, but they are longer than, e.g. the signs in bars 24-26 and 28. 
