mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : GE revisions

b. 28

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

leggieriss. in A

leggier. in GE (→FE)

leggiero in EE

leggierissimo suggested by the editors
..

It is difficult to say whether the change of indication introduced by GE (→FE,EE) was a result of the engraver's inattention, revision or even Chopin's proofreading. The change seems too insignificant to bother about, which rather eliminates the last two possibilities. According to us, we can take one other scenario into account, maybe the most likely – the visible traces of corrections in the L.H. part reveal that the parts of both hands were initially misaligned (while planning the L.H., the engraver did not take into consideration the final R.H. quaver). Had leggieriss. been in the area of the correction, the engraver could have then inaccurately reproduced it from memory.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors resulting from corrections , GE revisions

b. 30

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In A a few necessary or cautionary accidentals are missing – in the L.H. a  lowering g1 to g1, in the R.H. flats lowering g2 to g2 and c2 to c2 and a  to f2. In GE (→FE,EE) it was only the missing accidental in the L.H. that was added.
In the main text we add the above accidentals as well as a cautionary  to d3.

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

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

b. 30

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

in A

 in GE (→FE,EE,FESB)
..

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions

b. 35-36

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

4 staccato dots in A

8 wedges in GE (→FE,EE,FESB)

8 dots suggested by the editors
..

In A the staccato markings over the semiquavers are evidently represented by dots and clearly differ from, e.g. the wedges at the beginning of b. 35 or b. 39. According to us, the wedges in GE (→FE,EE) were an arbitrary decision of the engraver, who blithely approached the Chopinesque staccato markings on a number of occasions – cf., e.g. b. 10. By contrast, adding marks on the 4th beat of the bar, although without effect on performance – in both cases the marks serve as an example and should be propagated to all semiquavers in these bars – seems to be justified and may have come from Chopin (see also the note on b. 39-40). However, we believe that these two issues can be considered independently, hence in the main text we give dots (after A) in the entire 2nd half of the bar (after GE1).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE , Wedges

b. 35

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

g3-d4 in AsI, A, FE1 & GE2 (→GE3,FESB)

g3-c4-d4 in GE1 (→EE)
..

The version of GE1 (→EE) must be erroneous – the slightly blurred ledger line in A under d4 is not a notehead. The mistake was corrected in FE1 (→FE2) and GE2 (→GE3,FESB), in the former perhaps at Chopin's request.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE