mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

b. 311

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In A the  restoring e2 is missing, which is a patent mistake – cf. bars 278 and 286. The accidental is present in AsI; it was also added in GE1 and repeated in the remaining editions. In the main text we also add a cautionary  to e1.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A

b. 313

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

The  overlooked by Chopin before the last semiquaver (e2) was added only in FESB and GE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 314

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

No fingering in AsI & FESB

5 w A (literal reading→GE1→GE2,FE,EE)

3 in A (possible interpretation) & GE3
..

The fingering digit written in A could be interpreted twofold: as a '5', which is more graphically likely, or as a '3', which seems more natural, pianistically speaking. The source of the problem was the will to fit in the digit (apparently added later) under the word loco, ending the octave sign, which forced Chopin to write this digit almost horizontally; consequently, the resulting unnatural shape hampers the identification. The majority of the sources include a '5', whereas in the main text, we suggest a '3', due to practical reasons; it was also GE3 that considered this digit to be right. Such a solution is also supported by AsI, in which one can see deleted digits over the first two notes in the bar, most probably 5-4. In FESB both this digit and the adjacent ones were most probably overlooked (see the previous note).

The digit '3' added in pencil in our copy of GE2 is of no source value.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 314-315

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Slur to b. 315 in A

Slur to a1 in GE (→FE,EE)
..

In the main text we keep the precise slurring of A. The slurs having been separated on the bar line was an arbitrary decision of GE (→FE,EE).

category imprint:

issues: GE revisions

b. 315

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 staccato dots in A

Wedge in GE (→FE)

2 wedges in EE
..

In the main text we keep the two staccato dots visible in A over the f notes opening the semiquaver triplets. The fact that the first one was omitted in GE (→FE) most probably resulted from lack of space under the R.H. b semiquaver written on the bottom stave (in EE a wedge was added under this f). The second dot having been replaced by a wedge must have been an arbitrary decision of the engraver of GE1 – see bars 271-272.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Wedges