mUltimate Chopin

Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

b. 161-164

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

No slurs in A (→GE1→FE→EE)

Slurs in EE

Slur in bar 162 in GE2
..

The slurs, added both in EE and – to a lesser extent – in GE2, are certainly inauthentic. The slur in bar 162 can be considered to be justified in the light of the authentic slur in identical bar 166. According to us, in this context, the difference can suggest a slightly different performance, e.g. a more pronounced crescendo, hence we preserve the differentiated notation of A in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 169-170

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

2 slurs in A

1 slur in GE (→FE)

Slur over triplet in EE
..

In the main text we reproduce precisely the notation of A, since it seems to be unlikely that Chopin would like to combine these slurs in one – see bars 171-172. The version of GE (→FE) can be considered to be an acceptable interpretation of the notation of A. The version of EE, unified with the notation of analogous bars 172 and 174, adopted from FE, must be – in the light of the notation of A – considered erroneous.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE

b. 169-170

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

Slur in A

Slur in GE1 (→FE)

Slur in EE

Slur in GE2

2 slurs suggested by the editors
..

The absence of the slur over (under) the triplet in bar 170 is certainly Chopin's oversight, who overlooked the entire marking of the triplet – digit and slur. In the main text we add both. In GE1 (→FE) the two-note slur of A was replaced with a longer one, embracing the entire motif. It seems to be likely that it is Chopin's proofreading, although one can have doubts whether a possible entry of the composer in the proof copy was reproduced correctly: Chopin could have been thinking of a shorter slur, like in GE2. The version of EE is certainly arbitrary. We give a more detailed analysis of the slurs of both hands in these and analogous bars in bars 171-172. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 171

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

New slur in A (contextual interpretation) & GE2

Slur continued in GE1 (→FE→EE)
..

The slur embracing c3 and a2 in bar 171 in A begins still in bar 170, and in GE1 (→FE→EE) it was interpreted as running from the last crotchet in this bar (e3). According to us, it is not right, which is indicated by the slurs beginning from the c3 minims in bars 173 and 175. An argument for the start of the slur from the minim could be also the slur in the L.H., of the same range, as long as it was added by Chopin.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 171

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

No slur in A

New slur in GE (→FE)

Slur continued in EE
..

In the main text we give the slur added – probably by Chopin – in the proofreading of GE (→FE). A Chopin proofreading seems to be likely in this case, since in the entire phrase (bars 168-176), in spite of a few inaccuracies, Chopin marked with dots and slurs the parts of both hands; moreover, one can assume his participation in adding slurs in the L.H. in GE1 also in adjacent bars (bars 169-170 and analog.).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE