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
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main
Undo Clear

Articulation, Accents, Hairpins

b. 265

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

in A

in GE1 (→GE2)

 in FE1, EE & GE3

in FESB
..

The  hairpin is written in A between the staves and begins after the 1st R.H. chord (in Af the bottom arm starts as early as at the beginning of the bar). In GE (→FE,EE) the mark was moved to over the R.H. part, which, in this case, does not significantly influence its meaning. The change was most probably forced by lack of space between the staves; it cannot come from Chopin. The slight change of range in GE1 (→GE2) – the beginning of the mark was moved slightly to the right – was intensified by all subsequent editions, while FESB additionally reversed the direction of the mark, which is a frequent mistake in the first editions of Chopin's pieces. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Placement of markings , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Sign reversal

b. 266

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Signs & indications in A

Indications in GE (→FE)

Indications in EE
..

The omitted   marks seem to be a revision of GE (→FE,EE) aimed at simplifying the notation. In the main text we keep the combination of hairpins and verbal indications placed within the hairpins, typical of Chopin. There is a similar situation in bar 268.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 266

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Accent on 4th beat in A

No marks in GE (→FE,EE)

2 accents suggested by the editors
..

There is no reason why d1 on the 2nd beat of the bar should not be accented, as was the case with the analogous crotchets in the previous and next figures. Therefore, it is most probably Chopin's oversight in A. Admittedly, the accent is also absent in Af, but this is not an argument for intentional omission of the mark, since in this manuscript Chopin put accents only in the first three figures, in bars 263-264 (moreover, these three marks must be regarded as a pattern to be followed further on, which, paradoxically, is rather an argument for an accent). Due to the above, in the main text we add this accent. In the editions, the absence of an accent also on the 4th beat of the bar is almost certainly an oversight.
See also bar 268.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in GE

b. 267

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Vertical accent in A (→GE→FE1,EE)

No mark in FESB
..

The missing vertical accent is probably an oversight by the engraver of FESB. See also the next two notes in this bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE

b. 267

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 horizontal accents in A (→GE→FE1)

2 vertical accents in EE

1 accent in FESB
..

The change of the type of accents to the vertical one was an arbitrary decision of EE, quite frequent. The missing accent on c2 is most probably an oversight by the engraver of FESB.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE