b. 36-52
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The absence of the slurs combining the semiquaver with the chord in bars 36 and 38 in FE (→EE) is most probably an oversight by the engraver of FE (in EE the slur in bar 52 was overlooked too). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in EE |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The long accent was written into FC by Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In the main text we add a cautionary to b. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
Here and in bar 55 we give in the main text a non-slashed grace note after FE, which seem more reliable in this case. It is true that French editions included inaccuracies in grace notes, but Fontana would very often change non-slashed grace notes to slashed ones (cf. the description of FC in the Preludes, Op. 28). This situation occurs twice in the Mazurka, and in both places FE feature a , although almost all the remaining grace notes in entire opus 30 are reproduced there as (except bar 80). According to us, it guarantees the authenticity of this notation. As a matter of fact, the notation is probably of no significant importance in practical terms, since the grace note merely indicates that the trill is supposed to begin from the main note. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Notation of grace notes , Non-slashed grace notes , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||
b. 41
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The in tempo indication was most probably added as part of the Chopinesque proofreading of FE. There is a similar situation in bar 57. The change of the preposition from in to a was an arbitrary decision of the engraver/reviser of EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE |