mUltimate Chopin

Op. 30 No. 2, Mazurka in B minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
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. 54-56

composition: Op. 30 No. 2, Mazurka in B minor

No markings in sources

Pedalling suggested by the editors
..

As in bars 22-24, in the main text we suggest supplementing the pedalling after analogous bar 62 (in the version of FE) and bar 64 (on the basis of FC, since the text of FE is different there).

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 56

composition: Op. 30 No. 2, Mazurka in B minor

..

In the main text, we add a cautionary  before d.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 56

composition: Op. 30 No. 2, Mazurka in B minor

Longer slur in FC (→GE1) & FE (→EE)

Shorter slur in GE2
..

The shorter slur of GE2 resulted from arbitrary revision, modelled on the version of FC (→GE1) in bar 24 – see bar 32.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 56

composition: Op. 30 No. 2, Mazurka in B minor

Accent in FC (→GE)

Our variant suggestion
..

For reasons discussed in the analogous bar 24, we propose a variant solution in the main text, with an accent in parentheses.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

b. 61

composition: Op. 30 No. 2, Mazurka in B minor

g-c1-f1 in FC (→GE)

c1-f1 in FE (→EE)
..

As in bar 29, the version of FE (→EE) is most probably a mistake, since there are no reasons to differentiate bar 53 from bar 61. In FC the note was added – probably by Chopin – which is evidenced by the fact that the stem of this chord was being extended.

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

issues: Authentic corrections of FC