mUltimate Chopin

Op. 30 No. 1, Mazurka in C minor

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FC

b. 5-13

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

, ,  in FC (→GE)

No indications in FE (→EE)

in b. 5 in FES
..

The contrasting dynamic indications in bars 5, 9 and 13 were most probably added to FC by Chopin, as were many other markings (e.g. dynamic hairpins or accents). However, one has to emphasise that these marks, although their shape is the same as of some undoubtedly Chopinesque ones (e.g.  in the autograph of the Scherzo in B minor, Op. 31, bar 25,  in the autograph of the Etude in A, Op. 25 No. 1, bars 9 and 22,  in the autograph of the Etude in F minor, Op. 10 No. 9, bars 29 and 33 or in the later autograph of the Polonaise-Fantaisie, Op. 61, bar 1), are also very similar to the Fontana ones. The fact that they could have been written in Chopin's hand is indicated by, e.g. their more delicate, as if pale notation – cf. the analogous markings in the Mazurka in B minor no. 2, written certainly by Fontana.
In bar 5  was added in FES, which, to a certain extent, confirms Chopin's intention to contrast the particular theme phrases, dynamically and probably also expressively.
See also bars 37-45. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FES , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 7-15

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

No signs in FE (→EE)

in FC (→GE)
..

The  hairpin in bars 7 and 15 was almost certainly added to FC by Chopin. There is a similar situation in bar 18, 21 and 26 and in bars 28-30 and 43.

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

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 8-9

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

Slur in FE (→EE)

Slurs in FC (→GE)

Slurs suggested by the editors
..

In the main text we suggest a modified version of the slurring with which Chopin replaced in FC the slur/tie as visible in FE. We justify the extension of the slur encompassing the sequence of thirds with the fact that dragging a slur led over the thirds to d1-f1 at the beginning of bar 9 was difficult in the manuscript (due to the lack of space under the tie to g1) and presented a risk of the notation becoming overcomplicated.

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

issues: Authentic corrections of FC

b. 8-16

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

No marks in FE (→EE)

Long accents in FC

Short accents in GE
..

The accent in bar 8 entered into FC is undoubtedly a long accent. Therefore, it allows us to consider the less unambiguous accent placed in a similar context in bar 16 to be long too. Both marks were almost certainly added by Chopin. In GE all accents in this Mazurka are more or less of the same length, and we reproduce them as short. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Authentic corrections of FC

b. 16-17

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

Separate slurs in FE (→EE)

Continuous slur in FC (→GE)
..

In the main text we give the continuous FC (→GE) slur, since in this manuscript one can see that the slur ending initially over the g1 semiquaver in bar 16, as it is in FE, was prolonged over bar 17 and further.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: Authentic corrections of FC