Op. 50 No. 1, Mazurka in G major

The significant number of textual differences rules out the possibility of GE1 having come from any of the remaining sources. Therefore, the Stichvorlage must have been the currently lost manuscript, i.e. an autograph or a copy corrected by Chopin. The quite numerous small differences in, e.g. the layout, the range of slurs or hairpins point rather to the second autograph, hence we designate that alleged Stichvorlage by the symbol [A2].

A number of differences between GE1 and A1 bears traces of Chopinesque improvements, particularly:

• the slur and the staccato dot in b. 3-4 and analog.,
• arpeggio before the 2nd chord in b. 4 and analog.,
• pedalling in b. 4 and analog., 29, 73, 77, 81,
• more precise dynamic markings, e.g.  in b. 9 and analog., the  hairpin in b. 11 and analog. and 24, the accents in b. 30 and 34,  and  in b. 53 and 57,
• change of f¹ to g¹ in b. 96.

The remaining ones cannot be readily classifiable as improvements; they are rather equal variants:

• the continuous slurs in b. 7, 11 and analog.,
• the rhythmic variant in b. 21,
• the tie of G in b. 72-73,

In a few places, it is the markings of A1 that seem to be more accurate, e.g. the pedalling in b. 33 and 99,  in b. 43-44 or  in b. 55 and 56.

According to us, the above differences already originate from the notation of [A2], although some of the changes could have been introduced in the Chopinesque proofreading of GE1, the existence of which is more clearly indicated in the remaining two Mazurkas.

Some evident or likely inaccuracies may be imputable to the engraver, e.g. the beginnings of the R.H. slurs in b. 3 and analog. or of the L.H. ones in b. 12 and analog.

Due to the described improvements, we adopt GE1 as the principal source.