mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

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. 331

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In GE (→FE,EE) the e1 crotchet is provided with two augmentation dots, which could have been caused by the spot in A, resembling a second dot. It must be a mistake, since this e1 note is continued by the d1 quaver, falling on the 4th quaver in the bar. In FESB this note was placed on one stem with the g1 quaver, which changed its value to a double dotted quaver. It was probably an attempt at correcting the excessive rhythmic value of this note.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Different values of chord components , Errors in GE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 334-335

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Slurs to b & a1 in A & FE

Slurs to a1 & f1 in GE, possible interpretation

Slurs to b, f1 & a1 in EE, possible interpretation

Slurs to b & f1 in FESB, possible interpretation

Slurs to b & f1 in GE3, possible interpretation
..

In GE, FESB and EE bar 335 opens a new line, which caused the distortion of the slurs ending on the 1st quaver in this bar. In the graphic transcription we reproduce the versions of these editions without changes, whereas in the content transcription (version 'edited text') we give their most likely (according to us) interpretation. In the main text we reproduce the unequivocal notation of A and FE (the notation of FE could have resulted from Chopin's intervention in the copy of GE1 serving him as the basis, since on the basis of the notation of GE it is difficult to guess the correct version, and neither the reviser of EE nor the reviser of FESB succeeded at it).

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE , Revisions in FESB

b. 335

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

We add a cautionary  before a1 in the main text.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 335

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

As in the entire Variations, while writing A Chopin treated accidentals almost like key signature accidentals – he considered them to be valid in all octaves on a given stave and in a given clef. Therefore, in the R.H. part the last entered accidental is a  to d1, while in the L.H. part it is the sharps to D, f and all starting from d2 that are missing. All necessary accidentals – assuming that they are also valid for notes at the same pitch under the octave sign – were added already in GE (→FE,EE, in the latter the notes under the octave sign were also provided with accidentals).

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 335-336

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

The slurs of AsI are written offhandedly; they signal an intent rather than represent actual marks. This intent were most probably slurs encompassing the entire passage, including the 1st quaver in bar 336.
In A both slurs – both in the R.H. and the L.H. – indicate that the slurs from bar 335 (at the end of a line) should be continued, which is, however, not confirmed by bar 336, which does not contain their endings. In this case, there are no doubts that the slurs are supposed to reach the end of the passage, and this is how it was interpreted in GE (→FE,EE). In FESB the L.H. slur erroneously reaches only the end of bar 335.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation , Inaccuracies in FESB