Issues : Errors in GE
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »
b. 65
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The missing slur in GE seems to be an oversight of the engraver – in this edition L.H. slurs appear from b. 66, opening a new line, yet both slurs in b. 64-65 were overlooked. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||||||
b. 89
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The version of GE is most probably erroneous – it was the text of the next bar that was written, in which there is no b in the L.H. due to b, the 2nd R.H. quaver. In the discussed bar, the presence of b in the chords is advantageous both in terms of harmony (b from the previous bar moves to b) and dynamics – entry of the G major chord in dynamics. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||||||
b. 101
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The lack of staccato dot in GE must be recognized as an oversight by the engraver or Chopin himself – GE has the mark in the analogous b. 9. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||||||
b. 103
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The lack of staccato dots is an oversight by the engraver of GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||||||
b. 111-116
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we include the staccato dots under the bass notes in b. 112, 115 and 116 on the basis of AF (→FE). As an alternative solution, we suggest taking into account the dot of GE1 in b. 111 too. The omission of some of the dots in EE and GE2 is an oversight of the engravers. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »