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

Verbal indications

b. 117

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

=43 in FE (→GE)

No metronome indication in EE

=42 suggested by the editors
..

In the sources the metronome marking reads =43. It must be a mistake, since the Maelzel metronome does not show this value. Assuming that only one digit is wrong, in the main text we suggest the closest number accessible to the users of traditional metronomes. We choose 42, and not 44, since confusing one of two identical digits is much less likely. Theoretically speaking, one could think of other numbers meeting the above criteria, e.g. 48 or 63, but it is already the first one that can hardly be considered a slow tempo. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

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

b. 125

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

 in FE (→EE)

No markings in GE
..

The absence of the mark in GE probably results from the fact that Chopin entered it into FE (→EE) later, while proofreading, after the copy that served as the basis for GE had been sent. It is proven by a different font of the letter than in the remaining places in the piece.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE

b. 141

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

 in FE (→EE), literal reading

 in FE (possible interpretation→GE)

 earlier, contextual interpretation suggested by editors
..

According to us, the position of the  mark in this bar is an example of a manner of putting markings within their scope, and not at the beginning (as it is currently done), that is in the place from which they should be applied. In this case, the dynamic markings in bars 142-143, placed more precisely, show that the dynamic changes are to be related to the harmonic changes, on the 2nd quaver in the bar. Taking into account the above, in the main text we also put the discussed  mark under the 2nd quaver in the bar.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

issues: Centrally placed marks

b. 142-143

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

 &  in FE (→GE,EE)

 &  suggested by editors
..

The position of the  mark in bar 142 in the middle of the 2nd demisemiquaver sextuplet is almost certainly inaccurate – see the note in bar 141. The same applies to the  mark in bar 143. In the main text we provide a contextual interpretation of both marks, which coincide with the structural division of the figuration – marked by, e.g. harmonic changes – into whole-bar sections, starting from the 2nd quaver of the bar. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

b. 144

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

rall. - - till 6th quaver in FE

rall. in GE

No indication in EE

rall. - - - till end of bar suggested by the editors
..

The GE and EE versions most probably resulted from the engravers' inaccuracies or mistakes. According to us, the FE version is also inaccurate, even if it corresponds to the [A] notation, as it is hard to imagine that the absence of the last dashes could be indicating a sophisticated agogic nuance. Therefore, in the main text we suggest leading the dashes marking the range of the rallentando to the end of the bar, in accordance with the natural performance manner of figuration in this context.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

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