Pitch
|
b. 66
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In AI one can see the deleted initial form of the accompaniment – c category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Accompaniment changes , Corrections of AI |
|||||
|
b. 69
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we include the category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
|||||
|
b. 77-87
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the version of GE, in which the bass notes in b. 77, 79, 85 and 87 are placed an octave lower with respect to the remaining sources. There is no doubt that it is a Chopinesque improvement – he would use this tool on a number of occasions, e.g. in the Waltz in C category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Accompaniment changes |
|||||
|
b. 81-88
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
There is no slur over b. 81-88, written in the margin of AF. It is probably Chopin's oversight, although it is also likely that the composer was afraid that a slur could have hampered the interpretation of the notation on the added staves (by hand). Anyway, there is no doubt that the added fragment was also supposed to be included in the slur encompassing b. 80 and 89, written on the main staves. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Errors resulting from corrections |
|||||
|
b. 82-85
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
There are visible crossings-out of the original versions of the 2nd crotchet in b. 82 and 85 in AF. It is another clue that Chopin was distracted while writing this fragment (b. 81-88 were initially overlooked and then added on the staves drawn in the side margin). category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A |
and 2 g
lowering g
