mUltimate Chopin

Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Long accents

b. 26

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

 in A1, literal reading

Long accent in A1 (contextual interpretation) & GE

in FE (→EE)
..

In spite of its significant size, the  mark in A1 is undoubtedly a long accent, which is confirmed by a comparison with GE (based on [A2]) and with the analogous bars. The fact of shifting the mark in FE (→EE) most probably resulted from misinterpretation of its meaning.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE

b. 48-49

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

Long accent in A1

Short accent in FE (→EE)

  in GE1

 in GE2

  suggested by the editors

Our alternative suggestion
..

In the main text we suggest to reconstruct the version of [A2], which could have been distorted in GE1 due to the transition into a new line (after all, it cannot be excluded that it was in the autograph itself that the pair of hairpins was placed directly under the d1 minim). As there are no doubts that the marks are to emphasise this very minim, according to us, one can also combine the  of GE1 with the accent of A1. The versions of FE (→EE) and GE2 result from inaccuracies and mistakes of the engravers.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Centrally placed marks

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. 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