Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
b. 99
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The mark in this bar is a continuation of the hairpin (long accent) from the preceding bar, which falls at the end of the page in FE (→EE). EE feature here a short accent, like in the preceding bar. In the main text we give the version of GE, which do not contain any mark in this bar (after the long accent in b. 98). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies |
||||||||||||
b. 100-101
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
A comparison with other sources, as well as with the notation of both autographs in analogous b. 8-9, suggests that the hairpin is too long here in AF. Due to this reason, in the main text we suggest the notation used in an analogous place the first time, which is substantially consistent with the notation of GE1. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , Authentic corrections of FE , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||||||
b. 101
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The lack of staccato dot in GE must be recognized as an oversight by the engraver or Chopin himself – GE has the mark in the analogous b. 9. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||||||
b. 102-104
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The long accents under the triplets in b. 102 and 104 are only in GE. In the main text we place them over the notes, in accordance with the notation of AF in b. 10-12. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
||||||||||||
b. 103
|
composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor
..
The lack of staccato dots is an oversight by the engraver of GE2. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |