b. 99
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
The dimin. indication is an improvement introduced by Chopin in [A2] (→GE). See also b. 103. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||
b. 103
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
A under the 2nd quaver is both in A1 and GE1, which proves that it is not an inaccuracy, but a precise indication on how to preserve the G1 bass note with a pure G major chord. In the remaining sources, the mark was moved due to carelessness or due to an attempt at correcting the allegedly inaccurate notation of A1: in FE (→EE) it was moved under the 3rd beat of the bar, whereas in GE2 to the beginning of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 103
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
Like the dimin. in b. 99, the indication is an improvement introduced by Chopin in [A2] (→GE). category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
||||||||
b. 103
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
In [A2] (→GE) Chopin most probably consciously abandoned the idea to put a slur here. It is indicated by the change (or specification) of the dynamic concept through the addition of a mark in b. 103 and through a more specific indication of the staccato articulation for the chord in that bar (dot also over the L.H. fifth). After all, Chopin could have also removed the slur in the proofreading of FE (→EE), although an oversight (or misunderstanding) of the mark by the engraver of FE1 seems to be more likely. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in FE |
||||||||
b. 103
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
In the main text we include the staccato dots in the parts of both hands after GE1. The missing marks in GE2 must be an oversight. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in GE |