mUltimate Chopin

Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor

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. 23-24

composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor

Dotted rhythm in As

Minim in FE (→GE,EE)
..

The As version with a dotted rhythm in the upper voice was most likely changed by Chopin already in [A] (→FE→GE,EE). However, in bar 24, the first note (g1) was probably remade from a minim to a dotted crotchet, which means that in this bar Chopin changed his mind twice, ultimately returning to the first idea (minim).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Chopin's hesitations , Main-line changes

b. 24-25

composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor

No mark in As, FE1 (→GE)

in FE2 (→EEW)
..

Chopin added the  hairpin while proofreading FE2 (→EEW). See also the next note (above).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 24-26

composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor

No verbal indications in As & FE1 (→GE)

Ritenuto & in tempo in FE2 (→EEW)
..

Chopin added these indications while proofreading FE2 (→EEW).

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 24

composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor

Fingering written into FES

No teaching fingering
..

In the main text, we include the fingering digit written probably by Chopin into FES.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES

b. 25

composition: Op. 63 No. 2, Mazurka in F minor

Longer slur in FE (→GE1,EEW)

Shorter slur in GE2 (→GE3)
..

The shorter slur in GE2 (→GE3) could have resulted from a misinterpretation of the GE1 slur – it could have been regarded as an inaccurate slur under the quaver group. Not only does the slur indicate legato articulation, but it also separates the entire 5-note tenor voice motif, whose range is unobvious in the simplified Chopinesque notation.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions