![](/build/images/logo_left-en.png)
![](/build/images/pl-button.5cab5de0.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button.d3d09842.png)
![](/build/images/pomoc-button-en.5098433b.png)
Issues : Embracing slurs
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next »
b. 61-66
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major
..
Unlike in the preceding 8 bars, in this case Chopin did not introduce any changes to the slurs while proofreading FE2. Therefore, in the main text we keep the version of FE1 and the remaining sources. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Embracing slurs |
|||||
b. 62-63
|
composition: Op. 38, Ballade in F major category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , Embracing slurs , GE revisions |
|||||
b. 66-75
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In these bars, AI does not contain a single L.H. motivic/articulation slur, which results from the working nature of this autograph – cf. b. 64-65. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Embracing slurs |
|||||
b. 74-75
|
composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt I
..
It is difficult to determine what led to the difference in slurring between GC (→GE) and FE (→EE). The notation of [A] could have been ambiguous, e.g. between the lines. In the main text we give the continuous slur of GC, since there is no visible musical reason to disrupt this rhythmically homogeneous, smoothly descending sequence. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Embracing slurs , EE inaccuracies |
|||||
b. 78-79
|
composition: Op. 10 No 12, Etude in C minor
..
The moment of the slur's beginning in A is unclear, hence we suggest two possible interpretations. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Embracing slurs , Pointing slurs |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next »