mUltimate Chopin

Op. 63 No. 3, Mazurka in C# minor

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

Rhythm

b. 24

composition: Op. 63 No. 3, Mazurka in C# minor

Crotchet b in FE (→EEW)

Quaver b in GE
..

The traces of changes in print visible in FE reveal that the one-part writing in GE is the initial version, changed by Chopin in the stage of proofreading FE1 (→FE2→EE).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 32

composition: Op. 63 No. 3, Mazurka in C# minor

Minim c1 in sources

Quaver & minim c1 suggested by the editors
..

The simplified Chopinesque notation is formally erroneous – the c1 minim does not last to the end of this bar, hence it cannot be sustained to the next one. On the other hand, despite inaccuracies, the notation seems unequivocal, which is supported by, e.g. the absence of corrections in the editions. Chopin would often forgo rhythmic precision in favour of more malleable or readable notation. In the main text we suggest a specified version, which does not seem excessively complicated.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Rhythmic errors

b. 74

composition: Op. 63 No. 3, Mazurka in C# minor

No marking in FE

Pause in GE & EEW
..

In the main text we add a fermata in the L.H. part, required due to the parallel nature of the temporal course of both parts. The mark was also added in GE and EEW. In a similar context in bar 62, fermatas are present in the parts of both hands in all sources.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions