



b. 30-32
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor
..
In As only the upper voice of the R.H. is sketched. We assume that the remaining voices are to be the same as in the analogous bar 23. This gives two variants, because due to the corrections it is not certain which version was supposed to be the final one there. See also the note in the next bar. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Accompaniment changes |
||||||||
b. 31-32
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor
..
In the main text, we include the fingering digits written probably by Chopin into FES. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 31
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor
..
As in bar 23, As has an earlier version of the lower R.H. voice here, but unlike there, it is the only source in which this version has been preserved. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 31-32
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor
..
In As, only the upper R.H. voice is sketched, while the notation of the quaver in bar 31 is inaccurate and unclear – a spot of ink, which can be considered the note head, is located slightly below the middle of the stem of this quaver, which corresponds to the note a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Main-line changes |
||||||||
b. 34-36
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor
..
Rhythmic comminution of the upper R.H. voice in bars 34 and 36 was introduced by Chopin only when preparing the Mazurka for printing. It is worth noting that in bars 23-24 and 31-32 the direction of changes was the opposite – the version with shorter rhythmic values was the original one (the category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Main-line changes |