Issues : FE revisions
|
b. 45-46
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In the main text, we place a demisemiquaver under/over the last note of a semiquaver triplet in each of the 4 places where such a combination occurs, in accord with the notation of A (→GE→EE,FESB). In FE1 (→FE2) the demisemiquaver in these figures is placed after the last semiquaver of the triplet. This is certainly an arbitrary revision of the engraver of this edition, who had not yet seen that Chopin was using this Baroque-Classical convention, which in the 19th century was gradually superseded by a notation conforming with the strictly calculated nominal rhythmic values of the notes. In all places (as well as in bar 44) AsI notes a dotted rhythm in twice the rhythmic values, as category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Rhythmic errors , Dotted rhythms and triplets , FE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 46
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
According to us, the ending of the slur of A is inaccurate – Chopin did not lead the slur to the last semiquaver to keep the manuscript readable. The slur must concern the R.H. bottom voice, filled with semiquaver triplets, and is supposed to encompass the entire bar, as it was unequivocally marked in b. 45. This is the interpretation we give in the main text. In GE1 and the remaining editions, except GE3, the slur starts from the 2nd triplet, which is an inaccuracy caused by the 1st triplet having been placed on the bottom stave. FE and EE considered the ending of the slur (in GE1 (→GE2) accurately reflecting the notation of A) carelessly engraved, hence it was shortened. The range of the slur of GE3 is correct on both ends, yet the slur also encompasses the R.H. top voice (like the slurs in the remaining editions), which was clearly omitted by Chopin in A. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions , FE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 49-50
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete category imprint: Differences between sources issues: FE revisions , Hairpins denoting continuation , Revisions in FESB |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 55-61
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
Unlike in b. 16-17 and subsequent, GE arranged the L.H. notes correctly: it is clearly indicated that each of the 4 notes in each half-bar figure should be played separately (only at the beginning of b. 60 the second note – a dotted crotchet – is written too close to the minim, which could raise doubts if considered without the context of this entire fragment). In spite of that, FE combined the dotted crotchet with the minim in two places (at the beginning of b. 60 and at the beginning of b. 55), thus suggesting that they should be performed simultaneously (the same mistake was also committed at the beginning of b. 62). In FESB the L.H. arrangement is greatly inaccurate; however, the defects are due to carelessness, supposedly without influence on the understanding of the rhythmic structure of these bars. The boldest distortion is to be found in EE, in which in all places the dotted crotchets are combined with the preceding minims, which means that they are to be played simultaneously (also in b. 62). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , FE revisions |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
b. 63
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In the main text, we keep the extended performance indication as provided in A (→GE→FESB). In the remaining editions, the Chopinesque leggier. abbreviation, not entirely clear, was replaced with leggiero, the meaning of which (but not the form) most probably corresponds to the indication intended by Chopin – see the note to b. 14. At the same time, in EE there are more abbreviations, while in FE1 (→FE2) the word 'ma' was omitted; those changes almost certainly resulted from revision or the engraver's inaccuracies. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in FE , GE revisions , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A |
. This is an obvious mistake.
in 
