Issues : Long accents
|
b. 13
|
composition: Op. 10 No 7, Etude in C major
..
The accent in A (and the editions) does not differ significantly from the accent in the next bar. Taking into consideration the clearly less precise notation of this bar in A (graphic layout, missing flats, lack of the dot extending the minim), in the main text we suggest a long accent after analogous bars 5 and 9. category imprint: Interpretations within context issues: Long accents |
||||||||
|
b. 13-15
|
composition: Op. 10 No 4, Etude in C♯ minor
..
At the beginning, Chopin marked the dynamic highlight of the endings of these bars with long accents (AI), which he then replaced with hairpins and the crescendo indication (editions). According to us, the indications do not have to be incompatible (cf. analogous bars 63-66), hence in the main text we suggest a possibility of considering the accents. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||||
|
b. 13
|
composition: Op. 25 No 1, Etude in A♭ major
..
The type of accent used in AI may raise doubts. We interpret it as a long accent, as the sign is clearly bigger than the short accents in bars 6 and 10. In the final version, Chopin rejected the accent, choosing a pair of category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Long accents |
||||||||
|
b. 13-79
|
composition: Op. 26 No 1, Polonaise in C♯ minor
..
In the editions, almost all signs of accents were represented as short accents – the engraver of FE (→GE1) correctly placed the only long accent in bar 63, yet in EE and GE2 (→GE3→GE4→GE5) it was changed to a short one. According to us, the notation of the majority of the accents of A clearly indicates their interpretation as long accents. Apart from the aforementioned, in the manuscript there is a specific for Chopin, rarely present sign of an inverted long accent – see bar 47. category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information issues: Long accents , EE revisions , GE revisions , FE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 13
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 10, Prelude in C♯ minor
..
The issue of interpreting the mark as a long accent – see b. 1-14. The missing mark in GE is most probably an oversight of the engraver. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE |
in 
signs in this and the next bar instead. In the main text we give the hairpins in a form being compatible with the notation of 
