Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 125
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The type of accent intended by Chopin is not clear. A long accent seems more probable when we compare that bar to the analogous bar 117. GE (→FE→EE) have a short accent here. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 127
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The accent type that Chopin used in this bar is not obvious. There are more arguments, both graphic and musical, for the long accent option. GE (→FE→EE) all have short accents. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 128
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The type of accent used by Chopin in A is not quite obvious, yet both its shape and the comparison with analogous bars (120 and 122) clearly point to a long accent. In GE1 (→FE→EE) the accent was omitted and in GE2 (→GE3) a short one was added. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Errors in GE |
||||||
b. 128
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The accent mark in A is short, yet it does not differ much from the other two accents in bars 127-128 that are most probably long ones. However, a comparison with analogous bars 120, 122 and 134 convincingly suggests a short accent here. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
||||||
b. 131
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The accent mark in A is written inaccurately: the short mark is put after the note to which it refers. In GE (→FE→EE) the accent was understood as a short one, but in this context the use of a long accent by Chopin seems more probable. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents |