



Pedalling
b. 122-123
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we suggest the pedalling markings written in AF (→FE→EE) in analogous b. 30-31 in a variant form. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 137-139
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
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 category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
||||||
b. 139
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The pedalling of AF (→FE→EE), encompassing the first two beats of the bar, is related to the G category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 140
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The missing pedalling markings in GE may be an inadvertence of Chopin or a mistake of the engraver – cf. the note to b. 137-138. Due to this reason, in the main text we give the pedalling markings of AF (→FE→EE), particularly since they are present in FE, in which Chopin proofread the accompaniment in this bar – see the note above. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||
b. 149-152
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we include the changes of pedal under b. 149-150 and 151-152, present only in AF (→FE→EE), in a variant form. When choosing one of the versions, it is also the variants of dynamic indications that should be taken into account – in the sources the shorter pedalling markings are associated with more precise dynamic indications. category imprint: Differences between sources |