Rhythm
|
b. 2
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
It is difficult to say whether the L.H. top voice rest was added in FE by Chopin or by the engraver/reviser. As it does not appear in any of the eight further repetitions of this bar and is absent in the remaining sources, we do not include it in the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Authentic corrections of FE , FE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 3-4
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
It is difficult to say whether the missing tie of G is an actual variation of the text (original?), an oversight or an element overlooked as a result of abandoning the work on this manuscript. category imprint: Differences between sources |
||||||||
|
b. 8-9
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
It seems that Chopin abandoned the tie of c1 – in analogous b. 32-33 the tie is absent in all the sources, while in GE it is absent in all three analogous places (b. 8-9, 32-33 and 64-65). The absence of the tie in Afrag can be explained twofold (unless it is simply an oversight):
In FE1 (→EE) the tie was reproduced erroneously in b. 9 – such mirror images of marks can often be found in Chopin's pieces, e.g. in the Concerto in F Minor, Op. 21, 3rd mov., b. 172-173. The erroneous tie was removed in FE2; however, the correct one was not added – it may be seen as Chopin's proofreading and another argument for abandoning the tie of that note (the issue of presence of the c1 note in FE2 at the beginning of b. 9 – see the next note). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Chopin's hesitations , Authentic corrections of FE , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||
|
b. 12-36
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
According to us, prolonging the b minim with a dot in b. 12 and 36 is not musically justified due to the transfer of that element an octave higher in the last chord and due to the absence of a direct continuation of the tenor sound plane. It is most probably a revision provoked by the two-part notation of the G-b tenth in A1 (→FE→EE), which makes an impression of being metrically incomplete (in GE Chopin already used the one-part notation to write the tenth). Similar differences also appear in analogous b. 68. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , FE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 21
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major
..
There are no reasons to consider the version of GE to be erroneous: the change of rhythm with respect to the remaining sources is confirmed by the complementary slur. On the other hand, deprived of insight into [A2], one cannot state whether Chopin replaced therein a previous version or whether he simply wrote another one, which does not give us grounds to consider the previous one to be rejected. Due to the above reason, we consider both possibilities equal. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Dotted or even rhythm |
