Rhythm
b. 36-37
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
In A, the double-dotted quaver e1 on the 3rd beat of the bar is prolonged to the crotchet value and tied to e1 in the subsequent bar. The omission of the additional crotchet stem for that note in GE1 made it considerably harder to read that fragment properly. The notations of FE and EE further deform Chopin's notation: the tie for e1 is interpreted as a phrase mark linking the demisemiquaver d2 with the struck e1 in bar 37. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||||||
b. 50
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
In EE, the authentic graphic layout of the last chord was arbitrarily changed by being broken into two voices. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
|||||||||||
b. 52-53
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
In GE1 (→FE) the tie sustaining f2 lacks an ending in bar 53 (on a new page). In EE1 (→EE2) that tie was entirely omitted. In GE2 (→GE3) and EE3 the tie is notated correctly. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE |
|||||||||||
b. 56-57
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The tie running in A from b flat in the L.H. in bar 56 to b flat in the R.H. in bar 57 was omitted in GE1 (→FE→EE). This is a mistake, corrected in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||||||
b. 60
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
Chopin not always precisely notated the divisions between the voices. However, in this situation his notation is correct and exact from the point of view of voice-leading. Its simplification in GE (→FE→EE) must be therefore considered an inaccuracy. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |