|
b. 136-137
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The slur of AF is almost certainly Chopin's mistake, which is indicated by a comparison with all analogous figures – b. 10-11, 12-13, 102-103, 104-105 and 134-135. The version of FE (→EE) is most probably a result of an inaccurate interpretation of the slur of AF, written with a flourish (like in b. 134-135). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors of A |
||||||||
|
b. 136
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The più vivo indication was entered into A instead of the earlier sempre più vivo (which was deleted). According to us, the omission of sempre could have been correlated with it having been added before più animato in b. 126 (that sempre having been added later is evidenced by an unnaturally greater gap between sempre and più than between più and animato). In this situation, forgoing the indications in two places for a single più animato in b. 126, which we can see in FE (→GE,EE), can be considered the last stage of shaping the agogic changes in this fragment – Chopin could have assumed that such a solution would define here the relationships between the tempi in a simplest and most accurate manner, since it is from this bar that a new section begins, featuring a clearly different texture. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Errors in FE , Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 136
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In the main text we give the proofread – almost certainly by Chopin – version of FE, with a "lighter" sixth instead of a three-note chord. A similar situation is in b. 144 and 160. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||
|
b. 136
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
As in the next bar, in A the change of direction of the category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Unclear hairpins in A |
||||||||
|
b. 136-137
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In FC, the continuous slur written initially by the copyist, encompassing the last 5 bars, was divided into two slurs by Chopin between the 2nd and 3rd beats of this bar. We give this version, undoubtedly Chopinesque and present in the principal source, in the main text. On the other hand, the authenticity of the FE (→EE) version is uncertain, since one can easily imagine that the Chopinesque notation, either in [A] or in the proof copy of FE, could have been misinterpreted. Chopin could have, e.g. written the following, inaccurate slurs: category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Foreign hand additions in manuscripts , Authentic corrections of FC |
in 
2 in 
, which in