mUltimate Chopin

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Long accents

b. 13

composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor

Long accent in A (→FC,FE→EE), ACh & CGS

Short accent in GE

No mark in AB
..

The type of the accent written down in FC may be unclear if we do not compare it to other accents, e.g. in the Prelude No. 23 in F Major, b. 21, particularly without access to A. It justifies the engraver of GE to a certain extent. The missing accent in AB is compensated by the presence of  – see the note in the previous bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE

b. 14

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

A long accent in A

No mark in GE1 (→FE→EE)

 in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The long accent of A was omitted in GE1 (→FE→EE). It was reproduced in GE2 (→GE3) in the form of hairpins   reaching the 2nd beat of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents

b. 14

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

Long accent in GC

No mark in FE (→EE1)

Short L.H. accent in GE

Long L.H. accent in EE2
..

The accent in GC was probably added by Chopin. In GE, clearly against the manuscript, it was assigned to the L.H. and it was given a shape of a common, short accent. Such placed sign was repeated in EE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Authentic corrections in GC

b. 14

composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major

Long accent in FCI, literal reading

 in FCI (contextual interpretation) & GE2 (→GE3)

No sign in A (→FC→GE1, →FE→EE)
..

It is unclear how to interpret the  mark in FCI. Due to the abridged notation of the L.H. part and the manner of writing semibreves more or less in the middle of the bar, it can be considered both a whole-bar  hairpin (the mark begins under the d2-b2 sixth, i.e. at the beginning of the bar, and ends close to the end of the bar) and a long accent (it has the right length and position with respect to the sixth). Actually, a similar problem can be observed already in analogous b. 5, in which, however, we consider the mark written in A as a hint on how to resolve this doubt. In the discussed bar we give both possibilities, since the absence of the mark in A does not allow us to directly support any of them; moreover, the mark in FCI is slightly shorter than the one in b. 5.
GE2 added a whole-bar  hairpin, certainly by analogy to b. 5.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Long accents , GE revisions

b. 14

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Long accent in A

in GE (→FE,EE)

No sign in FESB
..

The traces of erasure visible in A reveal that Chopin initially inserted the  mark under the bottom stave, more or less there where it is to be found in the editions. It can also be seen that the initial mark was longer, since it reached the first L.H. quaver. The corrected version of the mark was shortened and moved over the first chord. In this form, the mark is to be interpreted as a long accent, which we give in the main text. The engraver of GE (→FE1,EE) moved the mark, which he most certainly considered a diminuendo, under the stave, probably to avoid a contradiction with poco cresc. or simply due to lack of space over the stave (a hairpin on the stave is poorly visible; such a solution is applied only in exceptional cases).
The fact that the mark is absent in FESB is most probably due to an oversight, one of a few in this bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Long accents , Corrections in A , GE revisions