mUltimate Chopin

Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 92

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Slur to g2 in AI & GE

Slur to e2 in Af, literal reading

Slur to d2 in FE

No slur in EE
..

The sources differ in the range of the R.H. slur. When interpreted literally, the slur of AF reaches e2 only, which is almost certainly an inaccuracy, since the slur's shape suggests that it should be led further, probably to the g2 minim. The version of FE is an alternative interpretation of the slur. In the main text we give the unequivocal slur of AI and GE. The missing slur in EE is probably an oversight – the entire section encompassing b. 69-92 is devoid of slurs.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 97

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Overlapping slurs in AI (contextual interpretation) & AF (literal reading→FE→EE)

Separate slurs in AF (contextual interpretation) & GE1

Overlapping slurs in GE2
..

A comparison with the unequivocal, concordant slurring of all sources in analogous b. 5 makes us consider the overlapping slurs of AF (→FE→EE) to be an inaccuracy. In AI the slur in b. 96 – at the end of the line – suggests continuation, which is not confirmed by the slur in b. 97. We interpret it as overlapping slurs (like in AF). In the main text we give the divided slurs of GE1, which, at the same time, are a contextual interpretation of the slurs of AF. The slurs of GE2 must be a mistake of the engraver.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 102-105

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

No slurs in AI & GE

Slurs in AF (literal reading→FE→EE)

Slurs in Af, contextual interpretation
..

The missing L.H. slurs must be considered Chopin's inadvertence, probably dating back to the stage of writing [AG] (→GE). The shorter first slur of FE (→EE) is a result of a typical inaccuracy of AF – in b. 103, opening a new page of the manuscript, there is no ending of the slur from b. 102, which suggests continuation.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation

b. 102-103

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Continuous slur in AI & GE

2 slurs in AF (literal reading→FE→EE)
..

The slurs of AF (→FE→EE) are almost certainly inaccurate, which is proven by the version of the remaining sources and by the concordant version of all sources in analogous places (b. 10-11 and 136-137). The inaccuracy was probably caused by the transition to a new page, which starts in AF from b. 103. Cf. the note on the L.H. slur.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 128-131

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

2 slurs in AF, contextual interpretation

Continuous slur in FE (→EE)

Slur in GE
..

In AF b. 129 opens a new line, and the slur that starts at the beginning of this bar does not match the slur at the end of b. 128, which suggests continuation. The continuous slur in FE is one of possible interpretations, yet a comparison with analogous b. 37 shows that Chopin probably meant the slurs to coincide, which we give as the main text. The fact that the slur beginning in b. 129 is absent in GE is either an earlier version written in [AG] or a mistake of the engraver.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation