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. 311

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In A the  restoring e2 is missing, which is a patent mistake – cf. bars 278 and 286. The accidental is present in AsI; it was also added in GE1 and repeated in the remaining editions. In the main text we also add a cautionary  to e1.

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

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A

b. 313

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

The  overlooked by Chopin before the last semiquaver (e2) was added only in FESB and GE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 313-314

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

3 fingering digits in AsI

4 fingering digits in A

3 digits in GE (→EE,FE1→FE2)

No fingering in FESB
..

This note concerns the 4 fingering digits at the end of bar 313 and on the 1st beat of bar 314, whose interpretation in the principal sources does not raise any difficulties – excluding the digit over the 1st semiquaver in bar 314, which we discuss separately.
In AsI the fingering starts from the beginning of bar 314, whereby the first 2 digits were crossed out. The digits over e2 and d2 were altered and are poorly legible; however, Chopin most probably opted for 4-5, as it is in the remaining sources.
The missing '1' digit in the sources could have been caused by its smaller size in A, as a result of which it looks like an insignificant spot. The fact that FESB does not include any fingering digit in the R.H. most probably resulted from the engraver's inattention.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , Inaccuracies in A , Errors in FESB

b. 314

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

No fingering in AsI & FESB

5 w A (literal reading→GE1→GE2,FE,EE)

3 in A (possible interpretation) & GE3
..

The fingering digit written in A could be interpreted twofold: as a '5', which is more graphically likely, or as a '3', which seems more natural, pianistically speaking. The source of the problem was the will to fit in the digit (apparently added later) under the word loco, ending the octave sign, which forced Chopin to write this digit almost horizontally; consequently, the resulting unnatural shape hampers the identification. The majority of the sources include a '5', whereas in the main text, we suggest a '3', due to practical reasons; it was also GE3 that considered this digit to be right. Such a solution is also supported by AsI, in which one can see deleted digits over the first two notes in the bar, most probably 5-4. In FESB both this digit and the adjacent ones were most probably overlooked (see the previous note).

The digit '3' added in pencil in our copy of GE2 is of no source value.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 314

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Fingering in AsI

No fingering in remaining sources
..

In the main text we include – on a similar basis as the teaching fingering – the fingering entered into AsI. Cf. bars 298-301.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions