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

b. 63

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Only staccato in AsI

staccato ma leggier. in A (→GE→FESB)

staccato leggiero in FE

staccato ma leggiero in EE
..

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

b. 63

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

No note in AsI

e2 in A (→GE→FE,FESB), literal reading

e1 in EE

e1 suggested by the editors
..

In A (→GE→FE) the sound of the last crotchet before the final passage may be questionable, since Chopin wrote it on the top stave, which is already under the influence of the octave sign. Therefore, when interpreted literally, it is an e2 note. However, this understanding of the notation is clearly contrary to the layout of the L.H. part, in which this note and the two rests that precede it are written on the same level, falling between the top notes of the F-c1-a1 chord. We regard this relation – kept in our edition – as key for the interpretation of this place, since it proves that while writing the discussed e1 note, Chopin  w a s  f i l l i n g  the sound of the  l e f t  hand chord; he did not take into account the ambiguous entering into the scope of the octave sign referring to the r i g h t hand at all. In the main text we put the discussed e1 note on the bottom stave, which eliminates all misunderstandings. A similar solution was also applied in EE, in which, however, it was also the entire previous L.H. chord (f-c1-a1) that was written on the bottom stave.

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

issues: EE revisions

b. 63

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

Starting from the f-c1-a1 chord, in EE the L.H. part is written down on the bottom stave in a treble clef. The clef was not cancelled until the very end of the bar, which is a patent oversight. We reproduce this notation in the graphic transcription (version "transcript"). In the content transcription (version "edited text"), we adjust the arrangement of EE to the remaining sources, which do not include clef changes.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , Errors resulting from corrections

b. 63

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Accent in A

No mark in GE (→FE,EE,FESB)
..

The missing accent on the e1 crotchet is probably an oversight or a different kind of mistake by the engraver of GE1 – see the previous note on the F-c fifth.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

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