mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in FE

b. 327

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

Grace note c2 in A (→GE) & EE

Grace note a1 in FE
..

The version of FE, although generally possible, is most probably a mistake – cf. bar 3. It was considered a Terzverschreibung error already in EE.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error

b. 328

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

Long accent in A (→GE)

No mark in FE (→EE)
..

The missing long accent in FE (→EE) is almost certainly an oversight.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 329

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

No sign in A (→GE)

 in FE (→EE)
..

The  sign may be a mistake of the engraver of FE (→EE). However, Chopin's proofreading cannot be entirely excluded: it may be that the composer wanted to prevent the next fragment from being performed without pedal or, which is more likely, he was thinking about a short pedal encompassing the octave leap of the top voice in the R.H.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Authentic corrections of FE , No pedal release mark

b. 337-340

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

8– – ¬ to bar 340 in A (→GE1), contextual interpretation & in EE2

No 8– – ¬ in FE (→EE1), GE2 & EE3

8– – ¬ over octave in bar 337, suggested by the editors
..

According to us, Chopin did not want these bars to differ from analogous bars 13-16, although there is no corresponding version in any of the sources. The first cause of such a state of affairs was a possible mistake committed by Chopin in A – an unnecessary extension of the line determining the range of the octave sign beyond the 2nd crotchet in bar 337. However, the correction of this error in FE (→EE1) – elimination of the entire octave sign – also removed the characteristic leap to the f3-f4 octave, which, due to its important role in the entire 3rd mov. of the Concerto, could not possibly be intended by Chopin. Therefore, the version of FE is most probably not entirely correct. The situation is even more obscure due to minor, obvious mistakes, e.g. no ending of the octave sign in bar 340 in A (assuming its correctness) and embracing the 1st crotchet in bar 337 in GE1 with the octave sign. In later editions, one of the previous versions was introduced arbitrarily, which does not influence the determination of the text in any way.  

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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

b. 353

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

Double slur in A

Single slur in GE & EE

No slur in FE
..

It is unclear how the two slurs in A are to be understood: their range is practically identical. Therefore, it seems that Chopin either wrote one of them by mistake or wanted to replace one of them with another. This is how it was interpreted in GE, reproducing only the top slur. We give this version in the main text, since all following similar figures have only one slur, mostly the top one. The absence of the slur in FE must be a mistake, corrected in EE, probably on the basis of comparison with analogous bars.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions