mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 256

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Shorter slurs in Af

Various slurs in A

Longer slurs in GE (→FE,EE)
..

In the main text we reproduce the clearly written slurs of A, although it is uncertain whether by differentiating the range of these slurs Chopin really wanted to suggest a detail of articulation. Both remaining, unified versions of slurring can be regarded as equivalent variants. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 284-285

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Slur from b2 to f3 in A, possible interpretation

Slur from a2 to f3 in GE (→FE,EE)

Slur from b2 to g3 in A, contextual interpretation
..

As in the previous bar, the beginning of the slur having been placed in GE (→FE,EE) at the beginning of bar 285 is probably a routine revision by the engraver of GE1. As far as the ending of the slur is concerned, in A it is clearly inaccurate – the fact that it reaches only e3 is musically inexplicable. However, it is uncertain whether Chopin wanted the slur to reach only f3, as is the case of GE (→FE,EE), or the g3 quaver, after the remaining slurs in bars 283-286, which always end on longer rhythmic values (quavers or crotchets). In the main text we incline toward the latter.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , GE revisions

b. 335-336

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

The slurs of AsI are written offhandedly; they signal an intent rather than represent actual marks. This intent were most probably slurs encompassing the entire passage, including the 1st quaver in bar 336.
In A both slurs – both in the R.H. and the L.H. – indicate that the slurs from bar 335 (at the end of a line) should be continued, which is, however, not confirmed by bar 336, which does not contain their endings. In this case, there are no doubts that the slurs are supposed to reach the end of the passage, and this is how it was interpreted in GE (→FE,EE). In FESB the L.H. slur erroneously reaches only the end of bar 335.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , Uncertain slur continuation , Inaccuracies in FESB

b. 354

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Tie to b1 in AsI, A (→possible reading of GE1→EE) & GE3

Slur over 4 quavers in GE1 (→FE,GE2→FESB)
..

The curved line written in A between the voices is at the pitch of b1 and almost certainly indicates that the dotted crotchet at this pitch should be sustained, as clearly marked by Chopin in AsI (both in the piano part and in the clarinet II part). In GE1 (→GE2) the endings of the tie are placed lower and not horizontally, which makes the tie seem to concern 4 quavers in the bottom voice. This is how it was reproduced in FE and FESB (as a slur), whereas in EE and GE3 it is undoubtedly a tie to b1.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A

b. 364-365

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Slur to G1-G in A, contextual interpretation

Slur to B1-B in GE (→FE,EE)
..

The range of the slur is not entirely clear in A, yet the slur goes beyond the bar line and points to the G1-G octave as the end point. In spite of that, in GE (→FE,EE) it encompasses only the last 3 quavers in bar 364. The engraver could have been influenced by the two previous slurs, which clearly encompassed the last quaver within their range. The interpretation suggested by us is supported by a slur correction in a similar motif a bar earlier and by the shape of the initial, three-quaver slur in that motif, radically different from the discussed one.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccurate slurs in A