Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 30
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 2, Mazurka in C major
..
Comparison with analogous bars 22, 26 and 34 reveals that the omission of hairpins in A (→GE→FE→EE) may be due to Chopin's inattention. Therefore we suggest adding the mark. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions |
||||||||
b. 30
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 2, Mazurka in C major
..
The extent of the hairpin mark in A is unclear; the lower arms reaches the 3rd beat of the bar, while the upper one only the second beat. We consider the upper arm to be a reliable indication, and we give that length in the main text. In GE (→FE→EE) the mark is even shorter, which definitely fails to reflect Chopin's intention. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
||||||||
b. 31
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 2, Mazurka in C major
..
The extent of the hairpin mark in A may give rise to certain doubts due to inexact alignment of the L.H. part under the R.H. part. The engraver of GE1 (→FE→EE) probably matched the beginning of the hairpin with the L.H. crotchets, which was an evident mistake later corrected in GE2 (→GE3). Applied to the R.H., the hairpin mark in A doubtless refers to the quaver figure on the 3rd beat of the bar, despite the fact that it begins a little earlier. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Unclear hairpins in A |
||||||||
b. 33
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 2, Mazurka in C major
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
||||||||
b. 34
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 2, Mazurka in C major
..
The extent of the hairpins in A is very clear. Nonetheless, in GE1 (→FE→EE) the mark was stretched over the entire bar. That inaccuracy was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |