|
b. 373
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In GE1 (→FE1,EE1) the last semiquaver is a2. The patent mistake – cf. analogous bar 271 – was corrected in FE2, probably at Chopin's request, and in GE2 (→GE3,FESB) and EE2 (→EE3). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE |
||||||||
|
b. 373-375
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In the main text, we add cautionary flats before b category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 374
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In the main text we suggest pedal marks modelled on an authentic indication in analogous bar 372. This bar opens the last page in A, which is devoid of pedal marks, which makes us assume that Chopin forgot to write them there. However, it cannot be ruled out that he did not repeat the marks on purpose due to a lower register of the bass and the R.H. part. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 375
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
The slur starting earlier in GE1 (→FE,EE,GE2→FESB) must be a mistake by the engraver of GE1, corrected in GE3, probably on the basis of a comparison with the L.H. slur and with bar 376. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , GE revisions |
||||||||
|
b. 375
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
We consider the added wedge in the L.H. part to be an apt specification of articulation, regardless of whether it was done at Chopin's request or not. In AsI staccato marks are absent both here and in the next bar, while the slur over these bars (see bar 376) proves that it was not caused solely by the working nature of the manuscript; back then, Chopin was most probably still pondering this kind of performance. category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: GE revisions |
2 in bar 373 and b
