Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt III

GE1 encompassed the Concerto in a version for solo piano and orchestral parts sold optionally. The present characterization, as well as all the detailed notes, pertain, with only few exceptions, to the version for one piano, consisting of the solo piano part and the authentic piano reductions of the orchestra sections (Tutti).

GE1 is based on A – see the corresponding characterization in the 1st mov. of the Concerto. For example, it is proved by the places in which the compliant text of the editions is a modification of the notation of A, whereas the traces of introduced changes can be seen only in GE1, e.g. in bar 78, 111.

Piano part in GE1 bears traces of detailed proofreading. However, only some of the introduced alterations can be unreservedly ascribed to Chopin (e.g. in bars 99-101, 366 and 368), and the majority are probably the work of a reviser. In spite of this, some errors, including those repeated after A, remained uncorrected:

• omission of the bottom note of the grace note in bar 11,
• omission of the bottom note of the 1st octave in the L.H. in bar 16,
• printing the dyads of the orchestral accompaniment in bars 30-32 and 374-375 with notes of a normal size,
• erroneously replacing the dots under the slur with a fermata in bar 80,
• erroneous octave sign in bars 102-103, 337-340,
• no naturals raising d³ to d³ in bars 113 and 115,
• no  raising a to a in bar 329,
• omission of c¹ in the L.H. at the beginning of bar 337,
• g² instead of b² in bar 356,
• omission of f² in the 1st chord in bar 398,
• omission of d² in the 2nd chord in bar 404,
• c² instead of d² in the 1st chord in bar 424,
• d² instead of e² at the end of bar 486,
• omission of b in the 2nd chord in the L.H. in bar 491.

The slurring of GE1 differs greatly from the slurring of A. We discuss complex reasons for this state of affairs in detail in the characterization of GE1 in the 1st mov. of the Concerto. Moreover, even in the places where both sources have the same slurs, it is frequently a result of proofreading of the original slurring, often very different, e.g. in bars 40-41, 83-86, 92-96, 232-236. In a number of places, the slurs of GE1 are clearly erroneous, e.g. in bars 29-31, 98, 126-129, 146-148, 225-227, 261-264. When trying to determine Chopin's intention, it is the situations in which the slurs resulting from the proofreading are different than those written in A, which are not always precise, that are most problematic. One cannot be positive whether a change was implemented at Chopin's request and even if it was so, whether he wanted to change the slurring or only to correct manifest errors.
It is highly likely that Chopin corrected the slurs in, e.g. bars 16-17, 169-176 (L.H.), 177-189, 353-360.
In turn, the following are examples of the changes of slurring whose authenticity is uncertain: bar 1, 12 and 28, 125-126, 151, 378, 507-510.

• change of the range of the tie of f¹ in bars 5-6,
• addition of two  in bars 78-79,
• omission of c² at the beginning of bar 392,
• change of the notation of the tremolandos in bars 489-490,
• addition of four  in bars 511-514.

GE1 overlooked a number of performance indications (see also the characterization of GE1 in the 2nd mov. of the Concerto), e.g.:

• staccato signs in bars 41 and 43, 75-76, 141-144, 506,
• fingering in bars 81-82, 478,
• legatissimo in bar 229,
•  in bar 324,
•  in bar 373,
•  in bar 494,
• dashes marking the range of the dynamic change in bars 498-501 and 507-509.

In general, the staccato signs were not differentiated, which meant that even evident wedges were also reproduced as dots, e.g. in bars 29-32.

There are copies of GE1 with an earlier variant of the cover, with no mention of the firms cooperating with B&H in Saint Petersburg and Warsaw.