b.
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
As in bar 1, the indication could have been added to FC by Chopin or removed in the stage of proofreading FE or in [A] after the copy had already been prepared. Due to the above, in the main text we suggest a variant solution. category imprint: |
||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
It is difficult to say how the difference in the indications at the beginning of the piece occurred. As legato was not being removed in FC, it was probably added by Chopin in the stage of proofreading FE or to the basis thereof. One of these scenarios presented an opportunity for a possible removal of , which in FC seems to have been written in Fontana's hand. Due to the above, in the main text we suggest it in a variant form (in brackets). See also bars 13 and 33. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: No initial dynamic marking , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
Differences in the wording of the title – see the Mazurka in C minor no. 1. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The absence of the indication in FC (→GE) suggests that the decision concerning a dedication came relatively late in the publishing process of the Mazurkas. See the Mazurka in C minor no. 1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Dedications |
||||||
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In the main text we add a cautionary to the f1 minim. category imprint: Editorial revisions |