b. 340
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
The omission of the hairpin in GE (→FE,EE) must have been a decision of the engraver of GE1, who considered the Chopinesque combination of a and cresc. an unnecessary complication. The same in bar 342. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 342
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions |
||||||||
b. 342-343
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
The missing slur over bar 342 is most probably Chopin's oversight, which he corrected in FE. The suggested alternative solutions are modelled on the continuous slur in analogous bars 355-357, whereby in the first one we keep the whole-bar slur over bar 341, entered into A. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
b. 342
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
Wedges instead of staccato dots almost certainly resulted from an ad hoc revision of the engraver of GE1, who unified these marks in the entire finale of the Variations. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Wedges |
||||||||
b. 342
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
According to us, the slur in A (→GE→FE,EE) is an element of an earlier version of this place left by inattention or simply a mistake. This is supported by the following arguments:
Due to these reasons, in the main text we omit this slur. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Corrections in A , Errors resulting from corrections |