Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
|
b. 1-4
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
In EE the accents in the first four bars, just like in the practically entire piece, are short. It is an arbitrary change of the revisers. Long accents, most probably written by Chopin in [A], are present here only in FE. The first three accents of GE introduce a certain ambiguity, since their typeface is slightly different (they are narrower) than of the remaining marks in this source – perhaps they are also supposed to be interpreted as long. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 14
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
The absence of two accents in EE1 is an oversight of the engraver. The mistake was rectified in EE2 (→EE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
|||||
|
b. 17-18
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
The slightly longer hairpin of FE (→EE), ending under e category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins |
|||||
|
b. 21
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
The dim. marking, placed between the arms of the category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 31
|
composition: Op. 19, Bolero
..
In FE, the accent on the 1st semiquaver in bar 31 is clearly longer than the accents in the adjacent bars. GE and EE considered it an insignificant inaccuracy, which has to be regarded as a right decision in this context. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Source & stylistic information issues: Inaccuracies in FE |
in 
2, may result from an inaccuracy of the engraver or of Chopin. According to us, its range should probably be the same as in bars 16 and 19, hence encompassing two semiquaver groups.
