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
Pitch
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Pitch

b. 29

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

f1-g1 in As

e1-f1 in FE (→GE,EE)
..

As in bar 21, in As the melodic voice is moved one second higher compared to the final version. The remaining voices are not written out, which hints – also as in bar 21 – at repeating the version of bar 17.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Accompaniment changes , Main-line changes

b. 30-32

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

As, earlier version, contextual interpretation

As, later version, contextual interpretation

FE (→GE,EE)
..

In As only the upper voice of the R.H. is sketched. We assume that the remaining voices are to be the same as in the analogous bar 23. This gives two variants, because due to the corrections it is not certain which version was supposed to be the final one there. See also the note in the next bar.

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

issues: Accompaniment changes

b. 31

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

Crotchet & 2 quavers in As, contextual interpretation

Crotchet & 2 quavers in As, contextual interpretation

Crotchet & 2 quavers in As, contextual interpretation

Dotted crotchet & quaver in FE (→GE,EE)

Dotted crotchet & quaver after FE (→GE,EE)

Dotted crotchet & quaver after FE (→GE,EE)
..

As in bar 23, As has an earlier version of the lower R.H. voice here, but unlike there, it is the only source in which this version has been preserved.

category imprint: Differences between sources

b. 31-32

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

Dotted rhythm in As, probable contextual interpretation

Dotted rhythm in As, possible interpretation

Minim in FE (→GE,EE)
..

In As, only the upper R.H. voice is sketched, while the notation of the quaver in bar 31 is inaccurate and unclear – a spot of ink, which can be considered the note head, is located slightly below the middle of the stem of this quaver, which corresponds to the note a1, possibly a1 (assuming omission of ). The stem itself ends at the height of d1 (d1). The note head could also be a smaller dot under the staff, it could be interpreted as d1 or perhaps b. Without access to the original, however, it is difficult to say whether and which of these spots is significant at all, as they may be small ink chips or even spots unrelated  to the writing process. The pitch of the intended note would then be determined by the very end of the stem. Assuming that the lower voice written in bar 23 is repeated in this bar, we consider the two versions given as variants to be reasonable readings. The interpretation of the lower dot as the note b could mean that Chopin marked the final version of the lower voice here (c1-b-g), which leads to versions obtained by combining the variants given here with the corresponding variant of the note pertaining to the lower voice of the R.H. (this possibility seems the least likely, taking into account the degree of inaccuracy of the record – the lack of a stick, a natural, and, above all, a ledger line).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Main-line changes

b. 36

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

..

In As one can see that before the 2nd quaver of the lower R.H. voice a  was initially entered. Chopin then changed it to a  and probably added a cautionary one before the a in the L.H. The accidental in the R.H. is also present in the version prepared for publication.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: Main-line changes