mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Long accents

b. 11

composition: Op. 27 No 1, Nocturne in C# minor

A long accent or diminuendo in GE

A short accent in FE (→EE)

Our suggestion

A different interpretation

Another interpretation
..  

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 11

composition: Op. 24 No. 1, Mazurka in G minor

A long accent in A

A short accent in GE (→FE→EE)
..

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE

b. 11

composition: Op. 10 No 2, Etude in A minor

No mark in CLI & FE (→GE,EE) 

Probable  in Ap

Possible long accent in Ap
..

Same as in analogous bars 3-4, we propose an alternative interpretation of the short  sign, resembling an accent, visible in Ap at the end of bar 11. A similar problem appears also in bars 12, 38 and 39.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

b. 11-12

composition: Op. 35, Sonata in B♭ minor, Mvt II

No marks in GC (→GE)

Long accents in FE

Short accents in EE
..

No accents in GC (→GE) is almost certainly an oversight of the copyist, who overlooked all signs between the staves in bars 7-13. The short accents in EE are certainly a result of the standard interpretation of the notation of FE.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies , Errors of GC

b. 12

composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor

A long accent in A

No accent in GE1 (→FE→EE)

A short accent in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The accent in A in this context should be considered a long one. The lack of any accent in GE1 (→FE→EE) must be a mistake. The (short) accent was supplemented in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents