mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in FE

b. 296

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

Wedge in A

Dot in GE1

No mark in FE (→EE)

Dots in both hands in GE2
..

The clear wedge of A is certainly the only authentic version of the markings of the 1st crotchet in the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions

b. 297-298

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

Motivic slurs in A (→GE1)

Whole-bar slurs in FE

Whole-bar slurs in both hands in EE

Motivic slurs in both hands in GE2
..

It cannot be excluded that the slurs of GE1, compliant with A, were corrected by Chopin in the last phase of proofreading, whereas the whole-bar long slurs of FE reproduce the state prior to the proofreading. Traces of such a change are visible in GE1 in a similar situation in bars 295-296. Anyway, the slurs of FE (→EE) are certainly erroneous, whereas the analogous slurs added in EE in the L.H. are inauthentic – it is difficult to assume that Chopin would order to copy an erroneous slurring. The slurs in the L.H. added in GE2 actually specify the notation of A, yet they cannot come from Chopin, since the edition was developed after his death on the basis of GE1 compared with A. In this situation, it can be considered almost certain that all slurs in the L.H. added in EE and GE2 in the entire section until bar 308 are an arbitrary revision – cf. notes on bars 293-294, 295-304, 301-302, 303-304 and 306-308.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE , Corrected slurs of Op. 21 in GE1

b. 311

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

 in A (→GE) & EE2 (→EE3)

 in FE (literal reading→EE1)

 (contextual interpretation of FE), our alternative suggestion
..

The placement of the dynamic marking in FE (→EE1) –  before the 2nd triplet in the bar – suggests a mistake. The Chopinesque proofreading entry could have been misinterpreted; it could have been  or even  if the original  was overlooked in the proof copy. In the first case, the composer's intention would be , which we include as an additional possibility. According to us, a possible change of the correctly printed  to  is highly unlikely.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 313

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

..

The  before the top note at the beginning of the bar in FE1 was overlooked. The mistake was corrected in FE2 (→EE).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , FE revisions

b. 327-329

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

Wedges in A

Dots in GE

Dot in bar 329 in FE (→EE)
..

The wedges in bars 327 and 329 were reproduced in GE (→FE→EE) as dots; at the same time, the sign in bar 327 was overlooked in FE (→EE), perhaps due to the erroneous slur.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Wedges