Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 5-6

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

Slur in A & GE2

Slur c1-b in GE1

Slur c1-d1 in FE

2 slurs in EE

Our alternative suggestion, slur a-b

..

The vague placement of the slur in GE1 – it can be seen as a slur of c1-d1 (literal interpretation) or c1-b (interpretation of FE) or even a-b – points to a possibility of the engraver's mistake. Due to this reason, in the main text we present the unquestionable slur of A. According to us, however, Chopin's proofreading cannot be excluded; it could have been inaccurately implemented by the engraver. In this case, we consider the slur of a-b to be a version probably intended by Chopin. The version of EE is most probably arbitrary, whereas GE2 restored the text of A

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 29-32

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

4 long accents in A

 & different accents in GE1

 & long accents in FE

 & accents on 2nd beat in EE

4 short accents in GE2

..

The notation of accents in A is clear and unambiguous – four long accents on the 3rd beat of each of the bars. In spite of this, the editions did not faithfully reproduce both the placement and the length of the signs. All changes in GE1 and FE are undoubtedly of an accidental nature, which, with a tightly packed text, leads to confusion and impedes the interpretation and reproduction of their notation. Sometimes, the accents start so close to  that it seems that both signs constitute a pair, accenting one strike together (Chopin would often use such combinations, but in this case A excludes such understanding of these signs). In FE, such pairs were placed so inaccurately that in bars 30 and 32  signs seem to fall only on the 3rd beat of the bar. EE homogenised the notation of bars 30-32, considering the entire  pairs to be applying to the 2nd beat; the kind of employed accents is unobvious, but they are longer than, e.g. the signs in bars 24-26 and 28. GE2 reproduces the notation of A, only replacing long accents with short ones.
Similar ambiguities and distortions of notation are present also in bars 369-375.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 30-32

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

..

The  signs in FE in bars 30 and 32 are placed so inaccurately that one could have an impression that they apply to the 3rd beat of the bar together with the accents.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 53-55

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

Ties to c2 in A (→GE)

Slurs g1-a1 in FE (→EE)

..

In GE1, the ties of c2 were reproduced literally, as short, horizontal, little ties preceding the c2 crotchets at the beginning of bars 54 and 55. The notation was misunderstood in FE (→EE), by assigning the curved lines to the bottom notes of chords, g1-a1. In GE2 the ties of A were interpreted in accordance with their meaning. A similar misunderstanding concerning the Chopinesque tie can also be seen in bars 55-56.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 65

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

Long accent in A

 in GE1

 in FE

 in EE & GE2

..

The sign in A is a typical long accent. In GE1 it was moved to the end of the triplet, so it is unknown which note it concerns (the engraver most probably considered it a  hairpin). In the remaining editions, the placement and size of the sign were subject to further arbitrary changes although the notations of EE and GE2 are generally similar to the notation of A.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies