mUltimate Chopin

Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

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. 92

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

Wedge in FE, probable reading

No marks in GE & EE

2 wedges suggested by the editors
..

In FE there is a poorly visible wedge under the 1st R.H. quaver. Taking into account similar situations in bar 62 and 89, in which Chopin provided with wedges the quavers ending the homogeneous octave sequences, preceding a rest, we consider it likely that there could be a wedge in the discussed place. Therefore, we provide it in the main text while adding a corresponding mark for the L.H. quaver. However, it cannot be ruled out that the poor visibility of the mark is not merely a misprint, but a piece of evidence that the wedge was inaccurately removed in the stage of proofreading. The absence of the mark both in GE and EE suggests that these editions adopted the above interpretation. In the face of Chopin's proofreading, this version can be considered an equal variant.

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

issues: Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 93

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

..

At the beginning of the bar in the main text we add a cautionary  to f in the L.H. and omit the unjustified  (cautionary?) to e1.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Cautionary accidentals , Last key signature sign

b. 93

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

scherz. in FE (→EE)

Scherzo in GE

scherzando suggested by editors
..

The Chopinesque scherz. abbreviation is undoubtedly meant to be read as scherzando, as in bar 173, in which any other interpretation is out of the question. Scherzo in GE must be a misunderstanding or simply a mistake. In the main text we write the abbreviation in full to avoid confusion.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 93

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

in b. 93 in sources

 at end of b. 92 suggested by editors
..

We put the  indication at the beginning of the variation, as there is no doubt that the upbeat is to be performed using the same dynamics (it absolutely cannot be , which appears half a bar earlier). The position of the marking in FE, if it is compliant with [A], provides an example for the manner of writing indications within their scope, and not at the beginning, e.g. in the first bar of a piece, disregarding the upbeat. This manner can be encountered in Chopin's works. Placing the mark over the top stave could have resulted from the lack of space between the staves, as it is difficult to assume that it was supposed to concern the R.H. only.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Placement of markings , Centrally placed marks

b. 94

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

 in FE (→GE,EE)

 suggested by the editors
..

The  hairpin at the beginning of bar 94 in FE (→GE,EE) is almost certainly a typical mistake by the engraver – cf. similar motifs in bars 93-94 and 96-99, particularly the first one in bar 96, which is a variant of the discussed one. This mistake, consisting in reversing the mark as if in a mirror image, can also be found in other pieces by Chopin, cf., e.g. the Nocturne in D, Op. 27 No. 2, bar 6, Scherzo in B minor, Op. 20, bar 306, Etude in C minor, Op. 10 No. 12, bar 53 or Prelude in E, Op. 28 No. 19, bar 52.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE