Issues : Uncertain slur continuation

Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main


b. 4

composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major

Slur in A (contextual interpretation→FCGE)

No slur in FE (→EE) & CGS

..

In A this bar was written in two lines, which contributed to an ambiguous situation in the L.H. slurring – the slur written at the end of the 1st half of the bar, running from the F demisemiquaver, has no ending in the new line. In the main text we adopt a natural interpretation of that notation – cf. the short slurs in b. 2-3 – adopted in FC (→GE). In this situation, we consider the absence of the slur in FE (→EE) to be a mistake of the engraver.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 4-5

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Continuous slur in A (literal reading→FEEE) & CGS

Separate slurs in A (contextual interpretation→FCGE), AB & ACh

..

The slurs of A between b. 4 and 5 are ambiguous – the slur in b. 4, which ends the line, clearly suggests continuation, which is not confirmed by the slur in b. 5. The four-bar structure of the Prelude, emphasized by the change of register and dynamics, makes us consider the ending of the slur in b. 4 to be inaccurate, which is confirmed by the notation of both later album autographs.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 4-5

composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor

..

In A, bar 4 ends the line. The slur at the end of that bar very clearly suggests that it should be continued; however, it is not confirmed by the slur in b. 5, which begins over the 1st note in the bar. According to us, it is the slur in b. 4 that is reliable, which is how it was interpreted in FE (→GE,EE). 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness

issues: Uncertain slur continuation

b. 4-5

composition: (Op. 4), Sonata in C minor, Mvt I

Continuous slur in A & FE

Separate slurs in GE (→EE,IE)

..

In the main text we provide the undoubtedly continuous A slur (although combined out of two fragments). In GE the slur in bar 5, which opens a new line (as in our transcriptions), was reproduced correctly, which means that it should be continued, but the slur's fragment in bar 4 reaches only the last quaver, e. EE and IE considered the slur in bar 4 to be correct, while FE guessed Chopin's intention.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Corrections in A , FE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 5-6

composition: Op. 64 No 3, Waltz in A♭ major

Slur continued in A (→FEEE)

New slur in GE

..

Due to accumulating inaccuracies, caused by the transition to a new line – in FE and GE it begins in bar 6 – the slur in GE ends in bar 5, whereas bar 6 is embraced with a new slur (although in GE1op and GE1Ab the slur in bar 6 suggests a continuation). In the main text, we give the unequivocal slurring of A (→FEEE). 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Uncertain slur continuation