Issues : EE inaccuracies
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next »
b. 92
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In AF the long accent under the culminant g2 minim reaches as far as the beginning of the next bar; therefore, taking into account the preceding and the following , one may also interpret it as a diminuendo mark. However, a comparison with the unequivocal long accents in b. 94, 98 suggests that the mark should rather be interpreted as an accent. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||||
b. 99
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The mark in this bar is a continuation of the hairpin (long accent) from the preceding bar, which falls at the end of the page in FE (→EE). EE feature here a short accent, like in the preceding bar. In the main text we give the version of GE, which do not contain any mark in this bar (after the long accent in b. 98). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||||
b. 124-125
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the continuous slur of AF, reproduced in FE and EE with minor inaccuracies related to the transition to a new line, starting from b. 125 – in EE the slur in b. 124 was led to the g crotchet only, whereas in FE the continuation of the slur on a new line is placed under the stave. The separated slurs of GE may be authentic – it seems that Chopin was gradually completing the slurring of the L.H. part while writing [AG], and it is AF that presents the final result of this process (in GE2 the slur ending in b. 124 was reproduced inaccurately, as a result of which it seems that its ending falls on a). The slur that begins in b. 125, perhaps added at the stage of proofreading of GE1, was placed under the stave – probably to avoid layout complications in b. 128. Therefore, as an alternative solution we suggest a slur of the same range, yet led over the tenor voice, to which it refers. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of GE |
||||||||||||
b. 127-129
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The notation of the tenor voice slurs eventually found its shape in AF. Probably due to layout complications in b. 128, the slurring of the remaining sources is incomplete or inaccurate:
In the main text we give the slur of AF, completed with a slur for the alto voice, written in this autograph in analogous b. 35-37. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||||
b. 163-164
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The missing dashes marking the range of the cresc. from b. 161 are probably an inaccuracy of EE. In AI, until b. 187, there are no performance indications except for the R.H. slurs and 5 accents in b. 173-177. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE inaccuracies |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next »