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. 199

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

Slurs over semiquavers in sources, literal reading

Slurs over whole motives suggested by editors
..

According to us, the slurs in the sources resulted from the FE engraver having misunderstood [A]. It is difficult to assume that Chopin would have wanted to pay a particular attention to the 3 middle notes of the bottom voice figure with the help of slurs, omitting the thematic top voice. It is most likely that the slurs in [A] were between the top voice notes and referred to the top voice, covering the entire bottom voice figure as well.
The same applies to bars 203-206.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE

b. 199

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

..

We add a cautionary  before g2 in the main text.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

b. 200

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

No slur in FE (→EE)

Slur in GE
..

The missing slur must be due to Chopin's inadvertence or the FE engraver's oversight (→EE). The slur added in GE could be coming from Chopin, yet such an addition could have also been performed by the reviser.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions

b. 201

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

Third in FE (→GE,EE)

e, our alternative suggestion
..

According to us, it is quite likely that the 1st L.H. quaver was being corrected in this bar in FE. The beam, placed too high, suggests that initially there was just one note, g, while the e notehead was added later. It is also likely that the correction was aimed at changing the probably erroneous bass note, from g to e, and not at adding another note. An e note would constitute a regular fourth leap with the preceding B note, soon repeated a second lower as A-d. Therefore, the correction would have remained unfinished, which was a frequent occurrence in Chopin's pieces (cf., e.g. the Ballade in F, Op. 38, bar 179 or the Concerto in F minor, Op. 21, mov. III, bar 282). The absence of a direct resolution of the a seventh from the preceding bar is not unusual in such accompanying figures, cf., e.g. the Fantaisie in F minor, Op. 49, bars 78 and 82 or the Nocturne in F minor, Op. 48 No. 2, bars 5-6 and analog. Taking into account the above, we suggest a more regular e-e1-b figure, justified by the above scenario, as an alternative version with respect to the source text.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error , Authentic corrections of FE , Partial corrections

b. 203-206

composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major

Slurs from 2nd to 4th semiquaver in FE (→GE,EE)

Slurs over whole motifs suggested by editors
..

As in bars 199-200, we consider the FE slurs (→GE,EE) to have resulted from a misinterpretation (except the second one in bar 204). The slurs suggested in the main text are based on a possible reconstruction of the [A] slurs.

category imprint: Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in FE