mUltimate Chopin

Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

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

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 38-48

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

6 staccato dots in FC (→GE1)

12 dots in FE (→EE)

18 dots in GE2

24 dots suggested by the editors
..

Upon the return of the main Mazurka theme (bars 38-40 and 46-48) staccato dots for the accompaniment crotchets appear in FE (→EE) much less regularly than in bars 2-4 and 10-12, while in FC (→GE1) to a slightly greater extent than the first time:

  • in FC dots are in bar 46 (both hands) and in bar 48 (R.H.);
  • FE – in bar 38 (both hands) and in bars 39 and 46-48 (R.H.).

Regardless of the reasons for these discrepancies and irregularities, a comparison with the initial section of the piece, in which FE include dots next to 22 out of 24 crotchets, proves that Chopin wanted to indicate the same articulation also here; however, he did it inaccurately. Taking into account the above, in the main text we provide all the discussed crotchets with dots.
In GE2 all dots in bars 38-40 were added, yet in bars 46-48 the incomplete notation of GE1 was left unchanged.
See also bar 45.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

b. 43

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

in FC (→GE)

No sign in FE (→EE)
..

In a different situation, the  mark, added by Chopin in FC, could be considered a long accent on the 3rd beat of the bar. However, in this case, a comparison with analogous bars 7 and 15 reveals that it is the interpretation adopted by GE that is correct – a  hairpin from the 2nd beat to the end of the bar.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 44

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

No mark in FC (→GE) & FE (→EE)

Long accent in FED, possible interpretation

Accent suggested by the editors
..

In the main text we suggest adding a long accent after analogous bar 8. On this occasion, we use square brackets, in spite of the accent's possible presence in one of the sources – it was probably added in FED; however, the interpretation of this carelessly written element is uncertain.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED

b. 45

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

Staccato dots in FC (→GE)

No marks in FE (→EE)
..

According to us, the dots over the L.H. crotchets are a mistake by the copyist, who possibly put the marks over the L.H. in bars 45-46 instead of in bars 46-47. The remaining three times this four-bar section appears (bars 1-4, 9-12 and 37-40), none of the sources include staccato dots in the first bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors of FC

b. 49-50

composition: Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

No marks in sources

Staccato dots suggested by the editors
..

In the main text we suggest adding staccato dots also here, since it seems that a possible change to the articulation of the chords would be right only just from bar 51.

category imprint: Editorial revisions