Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
|
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
|||||||||
|
b. 15
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major
..
As was the case with the slurs in this and the previous bar – see the note above – the reason for the absence of the accent both in AI and GE could be an oversight by Chopin or the engraver of GE1. As far as AI is concerned, it also has to be taken into account that in this manuscript the accents and details significantly deviate from the published version; therefore, it is likely that while writing AI the composer did not envision an accent here at all. However, it cannot be excluded that the mark was added by Chopin only just in the last stage of proofreading FE1. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in GE |
|||||||||
|
b. 16-23
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
|||||||||
|
b. 24
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major
..
The authenticity of the reversed short accent of FE (→EEC) is questionable, since such marks are absent in Chopinesque autographs. Therefore, we are most probably dealing with a reversed mark, as it was assessed in GE2 (→GE3) and EEW, or with it having been shortened, which we consider more likely due to the ascending second motif – see the Concerto in E minor, Op. 11, II mov., bar 29, and the Prelude in G, Op. 28 No. 3, bars 17-18. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Inaccuracies in GE , EE inaccuracies |
|||||||||
|
b. 27-30
|
composition: Op. 63 No. 1, Mazurka in B major
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations |
, 
& 
