mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Long accents

Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 277

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Long accent in A & GE2

Long accent suggested by the editors

No mark in GE1

Short accent in FE

2 short accents in EE
..

In A the long accent is placed over the R.H. chord, which, however, certainly does not mean that it concerns the R.H. part only. Therefore, in the main text we move it between the staves, in accordance with the Chopinesque notation of analogous bar 110. The reviser of EE was most probably motivated by a similar idea when adding another accent under the L.H. part. The use of a short accent in FE (→EE) is an inaccuracy, frequent in Chopinesque editions. The absence of the mark in GE1 must be a mistake by the engraver, rectified in GE2 after A. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions

b. 278

composition: Op. 21, Concerto in F minor, Mvt I

Long R.H. accent in A (literal reading→GE→FE)

R.H. short accent in EE

L.H. long accent in A, interpretation suggested by the editors
..

Same as in bar 130, we consider that it is more likely that the accent refers to the L.H.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A

b. 279

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

 above chords in A (→GE)

below R.H. chords in FE (→EE)

Long accent under R.H. chord suggested by the editors
..

It is difficult to say what Chopin's motives were when he put such a long mark in a place that appears several times (even if we limit ourselves to the strictest analogy, 4 times – bar 283 and previously bar 112 and 116) and that he marked with clearly shorter signs the other times – long accents (bars 116-118, 277, 281 and 285) or their slightly longer counterparts. Therefore, in the main text we provide a long accent. The position of the marks – see bar 277. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Placement of markings

b. 281

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

Long accent over R.H. chord in A

Long accent under R.H. chord suggested by the editors

Short accent over R.H. chord in FE

2 short accents in GE & EE
..

As in bar 277, in the main text we put the long accent placed in A over the R.H. chord between the staves, since it must concern both hands. This issue was also specified in GE and EE by adding another accent under the L.H. part. The fact that all the editions used short accents results from the absence of a defined category of long accent being a separate mark.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions

b. 283-285

composition: Op. 49, Fantaisie in F minor

2  & long accent in A, literal reading

3  in GE

Short accent & 2  in FE

Long accent & 2  in EE

3 long accents suggested by the editors
..

As in bar 110, 112 and 114, the  marks written in A, the first two of which are longer than typical long accents, are to be uniformly interpreted as long accents. This is supported by the A notation in analogous bars 116-118, in which the marks are clearly long accents. The versions of the editions resulted from the overlapping of interpretation inaccuracies and the attempts to assign the marks to one of the two categories – short accent or diminuendo hairpin.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies