Issues : Errors of FC
b. 20
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
It is difficult to say whether Chopin wanted the last chord in this bar to be performed arpeggio or not. Both in this bar and in analogous bar 116 only one of the authentic sources contains an arpeggio mark; however, it is a different source in each of these places – in this case it is present in FC, whereas in the other – in FE. In either case, it is both the absence of the mark (oversight) and its presence (mistake 'out of momentum') that could be a mistake. In the main text we suggest a version without an arpeggio, since in a few other places in the Mazurka it seems that in Chopin's eyes the presence of an arpeggio depended on the chord span (cf., e.g. bars 21-28, arpeggios only to the tenth chords, or bars 70-72, arpeggio only to the less convenient tenth chord on white keys). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC |
||||||||||||||
b. 23-25
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
The missing arpeggio marks in bars 23 and 25 must have resulted from oversights by the engraver of FE and the copyist, respectively. In the main text we give marks in both bars, which almost certainly corresponds to the notation of [A]. A similar addition was introduced in GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC |
||||||||||||||
b. 48
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In FC the last L.H. f1 note is a dotted quaver, as a result of which the bar includes one semiquaver too many. The mistake was corrected in GE1 to a version that is also in FE (→EE); therefore, we give it in the main text. The GE2 version is an alternative revision of the erroneous FC notation, not devoid of logic with respect to the R.H. rhythm, but almost certainly inauthentic. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Rhythmic errors , Errors of FC |
||||||||||||||
b. 53-54
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
||||||||||||||
b. 54-62
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor
..
In bars 54, 56-57 and 62 particular sources do not include some of the slurs linking the semiquaver to the chord. A comparison of the versions suggests that both in FC and FE at least one slur present in [A] was left out. On the other hand, both in EE and GE the texts of the bases were revised by adding slurs, yet none of them did it consistently. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , GE revisions , Errors of FC |