mUltimate Chopin

Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# 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. 17-20

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

..

In FE there is a slur combining the rest on the 3rd beat of bar 19 with the f minim in bar 20. This absurd mark was probably supposed to be in bars 17-18 as a tie to f, which is present in FC (→GE). In EE there is no L.H. slur/tie in bars 17-20. When this phrase is repeated in bars 113-116, the text of FE (→EE) is correct. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 17

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

..

We add a cautionary  before B1 in the main text.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 20

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Long accent in FC (→GE)

No mark in FC (→EE)
..

The long accent was written into FC by Chopin. Similarly in bar 116.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 20

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Arpeggio sign on 3rd beat in FC (→GE)

No sign in FE (→EE)
..

It is difficult to say whether Chopin wanted the last chord in this bar to be performed arpeggio or not. Both in this bar and in analogous bar 116 only one of the authentic sources contains an arpeggio mark; however, it is a different source in each of these places – in this case it is present in FC, whereas in the other – in FE. In either case, it is both the absence of the mark (oversight) and its presence (mistake 'out of momentum') that could be a mistake. In the main text we suggest a version without an arpeggio, since in a few other places in the Mazurka it seems that in Chopin's eyes the presence of an arpeggio depended on the chord span (cf., e.g. bars 21-28, arpeggios only to the tenth chords, or bars 70-72, arpeggio only to the less convenient tenth chord on white keys).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC

b. 21

composition: Op. 30 No. 4, Mazurka in C# minor

Accent on d2-f2 in FC (→GE)

Accent on a1 in FE (→EE)

Long accent on d2-f2, our alternative suggestion
..

The lack of access to [A] makes it impossible to say whether and which of the source versions corresponds to Chopin's intention. Therefore, we regard them as equal, while in the main text we provide the version of the principal source (FC). Our alternative proposal is an attempt at reproducing the [A] notation, which could have caused the observed discrepancy between the sources.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Inaccuracies in FC