mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of GE

b. 256

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In the manuscripts there are no accidentals in the second triplet (on the 3rd beat of the bar). In the main text we include both added flats – perhaps by Chopin in GE (→FE,EE) – although it is only the  restoring a1 that is indispensable. Incidentally, also in the previous triplet, an octave higher, the  to g2 present in all sources is also of a cautionary nature.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of GE , Last key signature sign

b. 263

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

8 ¯ ¯ ¯ in AsI, Af & GE (→FE,EE)

No 8 ¯ ¯ ¯ in A
..

Chopin's patent mistake in A is indicated by the presence of an octave sign both in the earlier manuscripts, AsI and Af, and in all editions. It is difficult to say whether the addition of this indication to GE1 came from Chopin, since in this context it could have seemed obvious.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Errors of A , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 276

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

No marks in AsI & A

Wedges in GE (→FE,EE)

Wedge & dot suggested by the editors
..

The missing staccato markings in A must be considered Chopin's inadvertence – the marks are present in all similar situations. The wedges added by GE are most probably inauthentic; however, even if they had been added at Chopin's request, it would have been an ad hoc correction, adjusted to the unifying manner of the engraver of GE1. Due to the above, in the main text we suggest adding marks in accordance with the consistent rule visible in A – wedges only for the bass notes on the main beats of the bar. 

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 306

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

 on first chord in A

after first chord in GE (→FE,EE)
..

It is uncertain what led to the difference in the position of the  indication. It is unlikely that we could be dealing with Chopinesque proofreading of GE1; moreover, there are no traces of the indication having been moved in print. However, the interpretation of this mark makes us consider the version of the editions to be more accurate. In A the mark is also written in the solo part, although repeating it only for its last chord does not seem intentional. Therefore, according to Chopin,  must have referred to the connecting passage marked as Tutti as well, which is confirmed by the full version of the Variations – the orchestral Tutti starts already at the beginning of the bar, whereby  marks are written in the parts of wind instruments at the beginning of the bar, and in the ones of string instruments – on the 2nd quaver. When copying  probably from the parts of the wind group, Chopin did not notice a possible ambiguity resulting from the lack of synchronisation of this indication with the beginning of the Tutti, which in the version for one piano is marked only just on the 2nd quaver in the bar. 

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE

b. 339

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

in AsI & A

No ornament in GE (→FE,EE)
..

It is difficult to say how the  mark was overlooked by the editions. The most likely explanation would be an oversight by the engraver – the mark in A is small and squeezed in between the beam and the Clarin[etto] indication – if it were not for the fact that this ornament is absent in the sources of the orchestral part, in AsI and in GEork (→FEork). In the main text we give the published version, since:

  • Chopin could have removed  or accepted its absence in GE1, which was probably controlled by him.
  • Chopin could have accepted the absence of the ornament in FE1, which he certainly proofread (probably both the copy of GE1 that served as the basis and the edition itself). This is all the more likely, since in the two preceding bars the composer introduced an important change to the R.H. part.

The version with an ornament, undoubtedly authentic, can be considered an equal variant.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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