mUltimate Chopin

Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 134-135

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

in AF

in FE (→EE)

No sign in GE

() suggested by the editors
..

The change of the range and position of the  hairpin in FE (→EE), although minor, is yet important – the mark of FE seems to concern the R.H. bottom voice, which does not result from the Chopinesque notation. According to us, it refers to the R.H. top voice, yet due to the notation without spaces between the great staves, its placement over this voice would be misleading – it could be interpreted as a mark under the L.H. part in b. 119. Taking into account the not entirely precise notation, in the main text we include a  in a variant form.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 134-136

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

Upper part, notation in AF

Upper part, notation in FE

Upper part, notation in GE

Upper part, notation in EE
..

In b. 134 and 136, the Chopinesque manner of writing stems always on the right-hand side of the noteheads contributed to an incomprehensible reproduction of the two-part notation of AF by the engraver of FE and, consequently, the totally erroneous notation of EE. In the main text we give the simplest and probably the latest notation introduced by Chopin in [AG] (→GE).
Similarly in b. 138-140.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Partial corrections

b. 134-135

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

..

In FE (→EE) the slur over the L.H. part starts already from the 1st crotchet in b. 134. It must be a result of misinterpretation of the notation of AF, in which the slur over the three chords encompasses them with plenty of margin. Moreover, in FE this slur reaches only the 3rd crotchet in b. 134, in spite of the fact that its ending is present in b. 135 – on a new line.
This inaccuracy was repeated in EE. See the previous note concerning the 1st beat of the bar.  

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Uncertain slur continuation , Errors repeated in EE

b. 136-137

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

Slur in bar 137 in AF

Slur in FE (→EE)

Slur to bar 137 in GE
..

The slur of AF is almost certainly Chopin's mistake, which is indicated by a comparison with all analogous figures – b. 10-11, 12-13, 102-103, 104-105 and 134-135. The version of FE (→EE) is most probably a result of an inaccurate interpretation of the slur of AF, written with a flourish (like in b. 134-135).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Errors of A

b. 137-139

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

No pedalling in AI & GE

Pedalling in AF

Pedalling in FE (→EE)
..

The absence of pedalling markings in GE must be considered an inaccuracy in these bars. All similar phrases – b. 11-12, 103-104 and 135-136 – are provided with such pedalling markings at least in one of the authentic sources; whenever discrepancies occur, they can most likely be considered an inaccuracy. In the discussed place the reason could have been, e.g. an oversight of the engraver of GE1 – these bars open a new line, and pedalling markings are absent in GE also in b. 139-140. In FE (→EE) the  mark was placed inaccurately, probably due to the notation of AF, which can be misleading at first sight.
In AI pedalling markings do not appear for the rest of the piece.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE