b. 39
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor
..
The thirds on the 1st beat are two-part in GE1 (→FE), which is definitely a mistake. The two-part notation - in the distorted or adjusted form - is also present in EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||
b. 39-40
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor
..
In those bars in EE the dots extending the value of quavers were arbitrarily replaced with semiquaver rests. Similar changes were also made in bar 47. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions |
||||||||
b. 39
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor
..
We determine the extent of the on the basis of A. In the editions, the hairpins become shorter and shorter, eventually to resemble a long accent in EE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||
b. 40
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 41
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor
..
For our main text we take the grace note with a slash, as in GE (→FE→EE). Chopin was sometimes inaccurate in his notation of grace notes, and so quavers and crotchets without slashes appear in places in which the context precludes their reading in accordance with classic rules. In our text, a long grace note would ruin the characteristic mazurka rhythm. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Non-slashed grace notes |