mUltimate Chopin

Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE inaccuracies

b. 1

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

No mark in AI

Long accent in AF (→FE) & GE

Short accent in EE
..

There is no accent in AI, since Chopin at some point decided not to finish this manuscript, e.g. in b. 1-15, there are no accents (out of a few ones) or staccato dots (see the description of AI). The short accent in EE is an inaccuracy resulting from the ignorance of the difference in meaning between the Chopinesque short and long accents.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies

b. 2

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

Long accent in AF (→FE)

No mark in AI & GE

Short accent in EE
..

The missing accent in GE must be the engraver's or Chopin's inadvertence, since in all similar situations, the syncopated crotchet beginning a motif is provided with an accent.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE inaccuracies

b. 29-31

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

 in AF

 in FE

 in EE

  in GE
..

In the main text we give the most accurate indications of GE1, most probably corresponding to the notation of [AG]. The minor differences in the range of the signs in FE, EE and GE2 bear hallmarks of inaccuracies and have a negligible impact on the meaning of the marks. See also b. 31.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies

b. 45-58

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

 under or after 3rd crotchet in AF, contextual interpretation

after 3rd crotchet in FE (→EE)

under 3rd crotchet in GE
..

AI is devoid of pedalling markings in the entire fragment (until b. 91), which does not carry any information about the pedalling itself – Chopin simply did not mark it in the unfinished manuscript; consequently, we do not treat it on a par with the other variants. The  marks are placed in AF before, under or after the 3rd crotchet of the bar, yet their placement is not explicitly linked to the harmonic content of the chords, e.g. marks after the 3rd crotchet are to be found in b. 48, 54 and 56, in which the chord does not change, as well as in b. 55, in which the chord changes on the 3rd beat to E major. FE and GE do not bear traces of intervention in this respect – they reproduced the notation of AF, yet inaccurately and with tendency to delay the pedal release. In the main text we reproduce the consistent notation of GE, in which the placement of the  marks was standardised in a satisfactory manner, as far as the sound is concerned, both in the bars where the chord changes and where it does not.
B. 46-47 are discussed separately. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A

b. 61-63

composition: Op. 50 No. 3, Mazurka in C♯ minor

 after 3rd crotchet in AF (→FE)

 under 3rd crotchet in GE & EE
..

Small differences in the placement of the  marks are of no practical meaning in this context. In the main text we reproduce the notation of AF (→FE), perhaps more accurate in this fragment – cf. b. 60. EE are lacking in the  mark in b. 63, which is most probably a mistake related to the transition to a new page; we consider neither this version nor the absence of pedalling in AI to be a variant.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in EE , EE inaccuracies