mUltimate Chopin

Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

b. 65-67

composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major

f1 in b. 65-66 in AI

One dotted minim f1 in b. 65 in FE1 (→GE1→GE2)

f1 in b. 65-67 in FE2 (→EEC) & GE3

f1 repeated in b. 67 in EEW
..

It is uncertain whether the version of FE1 (→GE1→GE2) is authentic, since the Chopinesque proofreading of FE2 could have only added the marks overlooked by the engraver. If, however, FE1 reproduced the [A] notation correctly, the differences between the three source versions would mean that Chopin hesitated to the very end how long the f1 note should be sustained here. The EEW version probably resulted from an oversight by the tie to f1 by the engraver, while the GE3 version almost certainly stems from FE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Chopin's hesitations , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 65

composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major

..

We add a cautionary  before e2 in the main text.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 66

composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major

..

EEW does not contain the  raising d2 to d2, which must be an oversight by the engraver. The corresponding accidental in FE was almost certainly added in the last stage of proofreading FE1, hence initially it was also absent in GE1, in which it was added in print along with a few other sharps. This can be deduced from the fact that both FE1 and GE1 did not provide space for this accidental before the note; therefore, in both editions it must have been added only just in the stage of proofreading the already printed text.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Errors in EE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 66-68

composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major

Slur from b. 67 in AI

Slur from b. 66 in FE (→GE,EE)
..

In the main text we give the unequivocal FE slur (→GE,EE). As far as the slurring of AI is concerned, both the slur beginning in bar 67 and the one ending at the beginning of bar 66 could be inaccurate, since it is unlikely that Chopin would have wanted to leave bar 66 without a slur. We consider the following scenario to be likely – Chopin first wrote a slur in bars 67-68 (reaching bar 69), then, while drawing a slur under bar 61 with the intention of leading it to the end of bar 66 or the beginning of bar 67, he hesitated a bar before, having considered that it could have been better to link bar 66 with the next bars (as in the final version). In this situation, unfinished slurs would mean that the doubt remained unresolved in the stage of writing AI.

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

issues: Chopin's hesitations

b. 67-68

composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major

dim. - - in AI

in FE (→GE,EE)
..

This is one of few places in which the difference in the dynamic markings between AI and the published version cannot be reduced to a difference in markings accuracy or to the intention of paying attention to another aspect of the dynamic course. In this case, it is a clearly defined dichotomy. If we take into account the fact that the return of the Mazurka main theme in bar 69 in both versions begins with a firm accent, the FE version (→GE,EE) is undoubtedly more coherent.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations