mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Corrections in A

b. 453-462

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

..

The crossings-out visible in A in bars 453-454 and 461-462 allow us to reconstruct the two previous versions of the accompaniment in these bars:


  1.  

The first version appeared in [AI] probably also in bars 421-422, which is proved by certain remaining elements thereof in the notation of A (and which explains them at the same time) – cf. both notes on the L.H. in bar 422. If one of the previous versions was also in bars 413-414, one could conclude that Chopin's concentration was decreasing as he was copying similar phrases:

  • bars 413-414 feature the faultlessly written final version.
  • in bars 421-422 Chopin initially wrote the middle version, including elements of the original version – d at the beginning of the bar and b-f1 at the end. He changed the bass still in A, yet the 3rd crotchet – only in the proofreading of FE.
  • in the discussed bars, the earlier versions were written in A in whole – in bars 453-454 initially the first, then the second, whereas in bars 461-462 – only the second one. Chopin then crossed it out and replaced with the final version.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Corrections in A , Accompaniment changes

b. 456

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

..

Just like in bars 453-454, the crossings-out visible in A allow us to read the previous version of this bar:


It allows us to classify the last chord in the L.H. in analogous bar 416 as the original version and not a Terzverschreibung error.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A

b. 472-475

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

4 slurs in A (possible interpretation→GE→FE→EE)

2 slurs in A, different interpretation
..

The issue whether the slurs at the transition between bars 472 and 473 and 474 and 475 are to be divided or combined is not clear in A, partially due to the corrections of both slurs and notes. A comparison with analogous figures in bars 476-480 suggests that the slurs having been reproduced by the editions as one-bar ones may correspond to Chopin's intention. However, the notation in bars 474-475 clearly suggests using a two-bar slur; such a possibility is not excluded by the notation of the two previous bars. Taking this into account, we suggest two interpretations of the discussed slurs.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 472-473

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

Double slur in A & GE2

Single slur in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

GE1 (→FE→EE) omitted the top slur, perhaps due to its atypical shape, resulting from corrections. The mark was added in GE2 together with top slurs in all similar figures.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Corrections in A , GE revisions

b. 476

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

g2 in A (→GE)

d2 in FE (→EE)
..

Chopin hesitated about the pitch of the last quaver. It is already the crossings-out in A that prove that the decision was changed twice – Chopin started with g2, changed it to d2, to return to g2. GE features a g2, however, in the proofreading of FE (→EE), Chopin changed it again to d2. It is the latest version that we give in the main text; yet both versions may be considered to be equal. It is interesting that there are no traces of similar hesitations to be found in an analogous situation, as far as the sound is concerned, 4 bars earlier.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations , Authentic corrections of FE