Issues : Corrections in A
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »
|
b. 63-64
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The notation of AI shows the evolution of the accompaniment in these bars. In both bars Chopin started from a typical bass-chord-chord structure, which he modified in b. 64 by replacing the last chord with a transitional F category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations , Deletions in A , Accompaniment changes , Corrections of AI |
|||||||||||
|
b. 82-85
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
There are visible crossings-out of the original versions of the 2nd crotchet in b. 82 and 85 in AF. It is another clue that Chopin was distracted while writing this fragment (b. 81-88 were initially overlooked and then added on the staves drawn in the side margin). category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A |
|||||||||||
|
b. 85-87
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The melodic variants in b. 85 and 87 of the motif opening the majority of the phrases of this theme were introduced only just at the stage of writing Stichvorlage autographs. Such a diversification of recurring motifs is typical of Chopin and would frequently appear in the final stages of shaping particular pieces, cf., e.g. the Mazurka in G Minor, Op. 24 No. 1, b. 57 and 59. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Corrections in A , Main-line changes |
|||||||||||
|
b. 87
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The version of AI with triads is the original one, left almost certainly by inadvertence. Its traces can also be seen in AF, in which, however, Chopin changed both chords – differently than in all analogous bars – to sixths. According to us, the change of the chord on the 3rd beat of the bar could have been a mistake; therefore, in the main text we give the unequivocal version of GE, which is compliant with the remaining analogous places. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , Deletions in A , Accompaniment changes |
|||||||||||
|
b. 100-101
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In AF one can see a correction of slurring in this place – the slurs, initially separated by a bar line (like in AI), were then combined. According to us, hesitation about the range of these slurs, visible in this and analogous places (b. 8-9), does not allow us to consider this correction to be final, since Chopin corrected only one of the versions of the divided slurs. In addition, in b. 8-9 the same slurring was probably corrected by Chopin in a different manner, although actually resulting in the same effect. Taking into account the above, in the main text we give the version that was corrected later. The versions of FE and GE may be considered equal variants. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations issues: Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations |
note. At the same time, he was improving the pitch of the bass notes, which he initially wrote as B and e and then moved them an octave lower (B1 and E); eventually, he left B and E. The way the changes are written is typical of drafts: gentle crossings-out or even leaving two versions with none of them having been crossed out. Therefore, it seems that they were introduced at a time when it was already known that the Mazurka had to be rewritten, hence 
before this note, which was corrected in 
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »