Issues : Authentic corrections of FC
|
b. 7-15
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor
..
The category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 8-9
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor
..
In the main text we suggest a modified version of the slurring with which Chopin replaced in FC the slur/tie as visible in FE. We justify the extension of the slur encompassing the sequence of thirds with the fact that dragging a slur led over the thirds to d1-f1 at the beginning of bar 9 was difficult in the manuscript (due to the lack of space under the tie to g1) and presented a risk of the notation becoming overcomplicated. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 8-16
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor
..
The accent in bar 8 entered into FC is undoubtedly a long accent. Therefore, it allows us to consider the less unambiguous accent placed in a similar context in bar 16 to be long too. Both marks were almost certainly added by Chopin. In GE all accents in this Mazurka are more or less of the same length, and we reproduce them as short. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 2, Mazurka in B minor
..
In FE the last R.H. note is a crotchet, as a result of which the bar includes 7 quavers. In the main text we correct this mistake after the FC notation (→GE); this version is also in EE. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Rhythmic errors , Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||
|
b. 9-10
|
composition: Op. 25 No 4, Etude in A minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
in 
