Slurs
|
b. 101
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
It is uncertain which articulation for the 2nd crotchet in the bar Chopin envisioned. A small spot over the note could be a staccato dot, and it was reproduced as such in GE2. In this case, the inaccurate beginning of the slur of A should be interpreted as written with flourish, yet concerning only the 3rd crotchet. According to us, it is still possible that the spot constitutes the beginning of the slur, separated from the following part due to ink stoppage. A abounds in defects of this kind, although they generally do not hamper the interpretation of the composer's intention – cf. e.g. 1st mov., bar 216 or 309, 2nd mov., bar 16. (The mentioned spot can be simply a spot and not be related to the notation of the Concerto at all). In the main text we give a slur from the 2nd crotchet due to: category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 102
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
An earlier beginning of the slur in FE (→EE) is certainly a mistake, similarly as in the case of the slur of GE1 (→FE→EE) in bars 98-99. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 117-120
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
The slur of A cannot correspond to the intention of Chopin, who probably interrupted drawing the slur due to lack of space – due to deletions in the part of the R.H. its final version was written on an adjacent stave, as a result of which its topmost elements already reach the viola part. Moreover, it cannot be excluded that the composer considered the octave sign to be a continuation of the slur (cf. a similar situation in the Etude in E category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Authentic corrections of FE , Authentic corrections of GE |
|||||||||||
|
b. 117
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
Starting the slur from the beginning of the bar in GE1 (→FE→EE) is almost certainly an inaccuracy, characteristic for the engraver of this edition. GE2 restored the text compliant with the Chopin notation. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 125-129
|
composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III
..
According to us, the slur in the L.H. in bars 125-126, present in GE1 (→FE→EE), could have been added by Chopin. It is indicated by corrections of the slurs in the R.H. – if it were Chopin who ordered to combine the slurs in the R.H. at the transition between those bars, he could have also added a slur in the L.H., as if to emphasise that the one-bar slurs from bars 121-124 are no more valid here. EE added also a slur in bars 127-128 (after the slur the edition has in the R.H.). The slurring of both hands was homogenised also in GE2. In the main text we preserve the notation of A, since the slurs of EE and GE2 are certainly arbitrary, whereas the slur added in GE1, even if it comes from Chopin, is probably to be related to the corrections of the erroneous slurs in the R.H. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE |
major, op. 10 no. 11, bars 
