Issues : Errors in GE
|
b. 330
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In GE3 two Terzverschreibung mistakes were committed in this bar – g1 instead of e1 on the 2nd semiquaver in the bar, and C instead of E on the 2nd L.H. quaver. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , Terzverschreibung error |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 330
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
According to us, the version of the editions resulted from inattention of the engraver of GE1, who did not notice the change of dynamic indications at the end of the bar. The crescendo in A emphasises the dissonant chord, introducing E major as a new key, constituting the starting point for further modulation. The accent in AsI confirms that from the very beginning Chopin wanted to underline the chord on the 6th quaver in the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 331
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
The missing dynamic hairpins under the L.H. part are almost certainly a mistake by the engraver of GE1. It is difficult to determine the exact range of the marks in A, since their arms are of different length. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors in GE , Inaccuracies in A |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 331
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In GE (→FE,EE) the e1 crotchet is provided with two augmentation dots, which could have been caused by the spot in A, resembling a second dot. It must be a mistake, since this e1 note is continued by the d1 quaver, falling on the 4th quaver in the bar. In FESB this note was placed on one stem with the g1 quaver, which changed its value to a double dotted quaver. It was probably an attempt at correcting the excessive rhythmic value of this note. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Different values of chord components , Errors in GE , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE |
||||||||||||||
|
b. 334-335
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In GE, FESB and EE bar 335 opens a new line, which caused the distortion of the slurs ending on the 1st quaver in this bar. In the graphic transcription we reproduce the versions of these editions without changes, whereas in the content transcription (version 'edited text') we give their most likely (according to us) interpretation. In the main text we reproduce the unequivocal notation of A and FE (the notation of FE could have resulted from Chopin's intervention in the copy of GE1 serving him as the basis, since on the basis of the notation of GE it is difficult to guess the correct version, and neither the reviser of EE nor the reviser of FESB succeeded at it). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , Authentic corrections of FE , Revisions in FESB |
in 
in 
& a1 in 
