mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in FE

b. 63

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

No mark in AsI & A

Long accent in GE (→FE)

Short accent in EE & FESB
..

The long accent added by GE1 could be considered a revision or even Chopin's intervention were it not for the  marking situated in the same place. The chord provided with this dynamic indication ends a long diminuendo (running from the beginning of this extended bar); therefore, emphasising it would be contrary to Chopin's clear idea, which was to attenuate the music. We assume a possible "symmetrical reflection" mistake – the accent that was supposed to be placed under the stem of the e1 crotchet after the minim chord was printed over the stem of the F-c fifth preceding that chord. Taking into account the above, we do not give this accent in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in GE , GE revisions , EE inaccuracies , Authentic corrections of GE

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. 282-283

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

con o in 8va from b. 283 in A & FESB

con o in 8va from b. 282 in GE

8va from b. 283 in FE1 (→FE2)

con 8ves from b. 282 in EE, contextual interpretation
..

According to us, the only aim of the version introduced by Chopin into FE1 (→FE2) could have been to specify the notation of GE1, in which the indication begins a quaver too early, while in bar 287 it does not signal the transition to the simple octave sign, resulting from the change of texture to chordal. In other words, it is uncertain whether FE1 (→FE2) omitting the possibility to perform bars 283-286 and the two beats of bar 287 in octaves was not simply a compromise to avoid unnecessary complications of proofreading. Due to the above, in the main text we keep the variant notation of A and FESB. In EE the form of the indication is wrong: con 8ves in 8va; when interpreted literally, it would indicate that the phrase is to be performed both in octaves and an octave higher. In the content transcription (version "edited text") we omit the second, misleading part of the indication.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 287

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In all sources, the dashes marking the range of the indication from bars 282-283 run continuously to the end of the tutti in bar 290. Except FE1 (→FE2), in which there is a simple octave sign, indicating that the given fragment is to be performed an octave higher, the notation seems to be simplified, since the chordal texture on the 3rd beat of bar 287 makes a performance with added octaves (con 8va) impossible. In the content transcriptions (the versions "edited text") and in the main text we specify this notation accordingly by inserting 8 on the 3rd beat of bar 287.

One can also ponder whether Chopin wanted "con o in", which seems to have been added before a simple octave sign (8va¯ ¯ ¯) in A, to be understood as "in octaves" initially and "an octave higher" from the 3rd beat of bar 287. In other words, it would be a joint instruction on how to perform the entire tutti, and not a description of two possible performances of the first phrase. Chopin would then expect a common-sense approach from the performer, who would have to guess that first, as long as possible, it is con 8va that is valid, and then, from the 3rd beat of bar 287 – in 8va. However, such understanding is contested by the way the indication was used in the Fantasy on Polish Airs, Op. 13, bars 130-148, in a context that rules out such an interpretation – the entire theme, encompassed with the indication, is written there in single notes, hence there are no grounds to assign con 8va to one fragment and in 8va to another.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Source & stylistic information

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A

b. 302

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

 after  in A

Long accent under f in GE (→FE1→FE2)

Short accent in EE & FESB
..

The short  mark may be considered an accent associated with the initial  or as a diminuendo hairpin, which, in this context, practically does not influence the meaning of this mark. On the other hand, placing it under the 1st f semiquaver, as it was performed in GE (→FE,EE), must be contrary to the notation of A and Chopin's intention. The differences in the length of the mark in individual editions most probably correspond to the different interpretations of the engravers: the ones who considered it an accent, inserted a short accent (EE and FESB), while diminuendo took the form of a long accent, which is present in GE (→FE1→FE2).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , EE inaccuracies