Verbal indications
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
It is impossible to state whether the omission of the dynamic marking in GE was intentional without [AG]. Due to the above reason, in the main text we include mezza voce from AF (→FE→EE) in a variant form. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: No initial dynamic marking |
|||||||||||
|
b. 1
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
AI is devoid of tempo markings. Generally, there are barely 3 verbal indications in the entire AI: The crossings-out visible in AF over the beginning of the piece prove that Chopin was looking for the best indication of its tempo and character, just like in both previous Mazurkas. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Chopin's hesitations , Deletions in A |
|||||||||||
|
b. 45
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the mezza voce indication after GE. It may be the latest version – see b. 44. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
|||||||||||
|
b. 61
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
AI does not include the sostenuto indication. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 73-75
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
In the main text we give the version of GE, which is probably later. In AF one can see that the hairpin blends with the L.H. slur, which could have prompted Chopin to use a verbal indication in [AG]. In FE the hairpin breaks at the end of the line, in b. 74, which EE reproduced in the simplest way possible by inserting a complete mark of such a range. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
in b. 17 and 89 and 
in b. 191; therefore, Chopin apparently abandoned writing more detailed performance indications when it turned out that this autograph would not be a Stichvorlage. Due to the above reason, both here and hereinafter we generally indicate the absence of indications in 
in 
in 
