mUltimate Chopin

Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 53

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

Long accent in A1 & GE1

Short accent in FE (→EE) & GE2
..

The shortened accent is an inaccuracy of FE (→EE) and GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 55

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

in A1

in FE1

No sign in GE & FE2

in EE

Our variant suggestion
..

In the main text we include the  hairpin written in A1 in a variant form. The mark seems to harmonise with the dynamic indications of GE; however, it cannot be ruled out that Chopin did not see the need to place that mark here. See also b. 56. The hairpin was not reproduced correctly in any of the three editions stemming from A1.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 56

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

in A1

Long accent in FE1

No sign in GE

Short accent in EE & FE2

Our variant suggestion
..

According to us, the mark in A1, although it could be considered a long accent (as it was interpreted in FE1), could be a diminuendo, hence we leave it with its actual length. In the main text we give the mark in brackets, since it is absent in GE, from which  in the next bar comes; moreover, it is also uncertain whether Chopin would have considered it compliant with the dynamic markings of GE.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies

b. 73-75

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

5 long accents in A1, probable interpretation

3 long, 2 short accents in A1, literal reading

2 long, 3 short accents suggested by the editors

5 short accents in FE (→EE) & GE
..

We give three possible interpretations of the accents of A1 in these bars, including also the notation of analogous b. 81-83 in A1 and GE1, based on [A2]. The short accents of the editions most probably result from the engravers' routine interpretation of the markings. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 76

composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

 in A1, literal reading

Long accent in A1, contextual interpretation

Short accent in FE (→EE) & GE
..

The mark in A1 is clearly longer than the accents in the previous 3 bars as well as than the marks in b. 81-83. In spite of that, according to us, it is to be interpreted as a long accent, which is indicated by its unequivocal graphic relationship with the b minim. Marks of similar length are featured in A1 as long accents, e.g. in b. 6 or 26. The short accent in the editions is most probably an inaccuracy (and certainly in FE). 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE