The mutual relationship between the versions of the chord in the R.H. in FE and GE1 turns out to be quite complex. The b1 note in FE was changed in GE1 to b
1, the traces thereof are visible in the latter. However, at the same time, in FE one can see traces of removal of the e2 note, which is present in GE1. That change is almost certainly Chopinesque – there is no proof that such subtle and unobvious changes could have been introduced in FE by someone other than the composer. Therefore, while proofreading the chord featuring b1, Chopin left that note unchanged. Could that version have been intended by him? We can hear such a chord in the next bar and when performing the Concerto with accompaniment – even a few times.
According to us, it is that concurrence of sound that could have caused Chopin to overlook the mistake – busy with balancing proportions of particular elements (removal of e2), perhaps even due to the combination with the chord in the next bar, he did not notice that b1 in the proofread chord appears prematurely. Actually, the concurrence of tone colour of the chord is only apparent – b1 in bar 498 is an element of the chord, whereas in bar 499 – a delay. What is more, emphasising other chord in bar 498 than the one around which the next 8 bars unfold, creating tension while awaiting a full cadenza in bars 508-510, significantly infringes the logic of the harmonic course of that fragment. Taking into account the above observations, as well as b1 featured undoubtedly in the orchestral part (in oboe II, French horn II and violas) and in analogous bar 13, one can consider that the 
in bar 498 is most likely a mistake. The version with b1 was preserved in later GE; it was also introduced in EE2 (→EE3).
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: GE revisions
notation: Pitch
