



Slurs
b. 8-9
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor
..
In the main text we suggest a modified version of the slurring with which Chopin replaced in FC the slur/tie as visible in FE. We justify the extension of the slur encompassing the sequence of thirds with the fact that dragging a slur led over the thirds to d1-f1 at the beginning of bar 9 was difficult in the manuscript (due to the lack of space under the tie to g1) and presented a risk of the notation becoming overcomplicated. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
||||
b. 16-17
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor
..
In the main text we give the continuous FC (→GE) slur, since in this manuscript one can see that the slur ending initially over the g1 semiquaver in bar 16, as it is in FE, was prolonged over bar 17 and further. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Authentic corrections of FC |
||||
b. 18-19
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor
..
In this case we give priority to the continuous slur of FE (→EE) due to the analogy with bars 26-27, in which all sources have a continuous slur. The version of FC is less reliable, since bar 19 opens a new line of text, and the transition into a new line is often conducive to inaccuracies in slurring. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||
b. 22-23
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor
..
The difference in slurring can have a minimal impact on the performance in this case, hence in the main text we give the version of the principal source, which is FC (→GE). category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||
b. 24
|
composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE |