Issues : Long accents
b. 76
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The long accent over the minim b flat1 in A was written as a short one in GE. In FE it was placed under the note. In EE the accent is absent, as it was interpreted as hairpins complementing the hairpins from bar 75. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE |
|||||||||||||
b. 90
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
The long accent of A was read in GE (→FE→EE) as hairpins between two notes of the melody in this bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents |
|||||||||||||
b. 91
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
A long accent of A was read in GE1 (→FE→EE, →GE2) as a short one. In GE3, the accent was ascribed to the chord on the 2nd crotchet of the left hand. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
b. 92
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
It is not clear what type of accent was used in A; it collides with the indication cresc., which makes it difficult to determine its shape. We consider a long accent to be more probable (cf. signs in the neighbouring bars). Omission of the accent mark in GE1 (→FE→EE) is definitely an error. The accent was put back in GE2 (→GE3), yet ascribing it to the L.H. chord seems unfortunate. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Errors in GE , GE revisions |
|||||||||||||
b. 93
|
composition: Op. 24 No. 4, Mazurka in B♭ minor
..
A long accent in A was reproduced in GE (→FE→EE) as a short one. in GE2 (→GE3) the mark is clearly written for the left hand part, which does not follow from the notation of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , GE revisions |