mUltimate Chopin

Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Slurs
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Slurs

b. 124-125

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

2 slurs in FC (→GE)

Continuous slur in FE (→EE)
..

Both versions of slurring are musically justified – the slur of FC begins together with the new four-bar section, while the slur of FE emphasises the fact that the new section derives from the ending of the preceding phrase. We give the slurs of the principal source.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 130-131

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Separate slurs in FC (→GE)

Continuous slur in FE (→EE)
..

The division of the slur in FC falls on such unnatural place that one could assume a misunderstanding in the reading of [A], e.g. caused by the transition into a new line in the autograph. Due to the above, in the main text we give the slur of FE, more reliable in this context. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 134-135

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Separate slurs in FC (literal reading) & FE (→EE)

Continuous slur in GE
..

In FC the slur in bar 134, the last in the line, suggests that it should be continued, which is not confirmed by the slur beginning in bar 135 from the 1st note. We assume that they are separated slurs, as in FE (→EE), whereas in GE they were interpreted as a continuous slur.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FC , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 136-137

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

New slur from d2 in FC (→GE)

New slur from c2 in FE (→EE)
..

In FC, the continuous slur written initially by the copyist, encompassing the last 5 bars, was divided into two slurs by Chopin between the 2nd and 3rd beats of this bar. We give this version, undoubtedly Chopinesque and present in the principal source, in the main text. On the other hand, the authenticity of the FE (→EE) version is uncertain, since one can easily imagine that the Chopinesque notation, either in [A] or in the proof copy of FE, could have been misinterpreted. Chopin could have, e.g. written the following, inaccurate slurs: , which in FE were interpreted in accordance with the tendency to adjust marks to regular rhythmic structures, e.g. bars, typical of engravers.
The crossed-out fragment of the initial, continuous slur visible in FC comes from the reviser of GE1, who thus clarified the slurring correction entered by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Foreign hand additions in manuscripts , Authentic corrections of FC