|
b. 157-160
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The L.H. slurs are almost certainly an improvement introduced in [AG] (→GE). A similar situation can be found in b. 165-168. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
|||||
|
b. 157
|
composition: Op. 44, Polonaise in F♯ minor
..
The presence of an accent in GE sets this bar apart from all those based on the dance, mazurka accompaniment, which could suggest a mistake. According to us, however, there are no reasons to doubt the authenticity of the mark, since it is also the only bar in which the 2nd and the 3rd crotchets are octaves, which justifies the accent on the former, which is supposed to emphasise the atypical sound. The absence of the mark in FE (→EE) could be explained by an oversight of the copyist or of the engraver (as it is in many other situations); it is also likely that it was added by Chopin to [A] after [FC] had already been finished. In turn, it seems highly unlikely that Chopin would intentionally omit the mark; therefore, we introduce it directly into the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||
|
b. 157
|
composition: Op. 23, Ballade in G minor
..
The sharp to f category imprint: Source & stylistic information issues: Accidental below/above the note |
|||||
|
b. 157
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In this and the next two bars AsI contains an earlier version of the alternative L.H. part. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Accompaniment changes |
|||||
|
b. 158
|
composition: Op. 42, Waltz in A♭ major
..
In FE0 (→FE,EE) there is no arpeggio sign. It was omitted also in GE, despite the fact that Chopin added it in FEG. Chopin's pencilled entry in FED confirms his intent to arpeggiate the chord. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Errors in GE |
3 is written in 
2. Such inaccuracies are 
