Issues : Uncertain slur continuation
|
b. 4
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major
..
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 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
..
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 |
|||||||||
|
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. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 64 No 3, Waltz in A♭ major
..
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 (→FE→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||
|
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
The slurs of Afrag and GE are unequivocal; since such a slur is featured in all analogous bars in GE, we give it – as present in [A2] – in the main text. The slur of FE is clearly erroneous, which was corrected in FE2 and EE, most probably on the basis of comparison with b. 1-2. The slur of A1 is problematic; just like the remaining slurs in the 1st line of the manuscript, it reaches the end of the bar, yet its shape suggests that it is supposed to be led to the beginning of the next bar. It is explicitly confirmed by the fact of ending the slur in b. 11 (on a new line) as well as by the unequivocal slur in b. 25-27, corrected by Chopin. In such a context, we interpret the slur of A1 as reaching the 1st quaver in b. 7. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , FE revisions , Uncertain slur continuation , Tenuto slurs |
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 
