mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Inaccuracies in A

b. 256

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

e notes in A, literal reading

E notes in AsI & A (contextual interpretation→GE→FE,EE)
..

In the entire passage Chopin did not insert any accidentals except the naturals to the 1st and 3rd notes (e and a). The necessity to raise subsequent a to a is beyond dispute; however, the use of e1, e2 and e3 would be harmonically and pianistically possible. Nevertheless, the majority of the arguments support the use of e1, e2 and e3:

  • in figurations based on repeating a certain figure in various octaves (most often arpeggios or scales), Chopin considered the accidentals put in the first figure to be valid in the entire sequence. He would mark possible exceptions with cautionary accidentals, e.g. the flats to b2 in bars 60 and 62. If he had heard e1 in the discussed passage, most probably he would have provided it with a ;
  • the above reasoning is partially confirmed by AsI, which has a  before the penultimate note of beat 1 (e3);
  • the harmonic context is based on an F major chord (without e seventh), which is confirmed both by the orchestral part and the piano chords (on the 3rd quaver and at the end of the bar). The e notes in the arpeggio would be regarded chord tones, giving an impression of a dominant seventh chord (F7). By contrast, we hear the altered e notes as non-chord tones, which contributes to the impression that the F major chord is regarded as the harmonic basis;
  • the naturals raising e1 to e1 and e2 to e2 were added in GE (→FE,EE) (the latter also influences e3; a third  was added only by GE3), even if inserted by the reviser, were not questioned by Chopin in the stage of proofreading FE1.

As far as the missing naturals to a1 and a2 are concerned, in GE1 (→FE1,GE2→FESB) it was only the one to a2 that was added, which was supplemented by EE and GE3.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of GE , Inaccuracies in A

b. 257

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

f3 in chord in AsI & A

d3 in Af, FE1 (→FE2) & GE2 (→GE3,FESB)

es3 in GE1 (→EE)
..

The version of AsI and A with f3 as the topmost note of the chord on the 2nd beat of the bar is almost certainly erroneous, and it was d3 that was intended by Chopin from the very beginning. It is supported by:

  • d3 here in Af, written almost certainly earlier than A;
  • melodic analogy between the motifs at the beginning of bars 255 and 257 and the ascending sixths, d1-d3-b3 and f1-f2-d3, respectively;
  • d3 in FE1 (→FE2), which, with respect to the erroneous version of GE1 (see below), must have resulted from proofreading, most probably Chopinesque;
  • the natural character of the octave piano position.

What is more, the discussed note is written in A inaccurately, hence in GE1 (→EE) it was reproduced as e3. In GE2 (→GE3,FESB) it was changed to d3, which could have been one of the changes suggested by Chopin, if we were to assume that he took part in the editing of GE2.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Terzverschreibung error , GE revisions , Errors in the number of ledger lines , Errors of A , Inaccurate note pitch in A , Authentic corrections of FE , Inaccuracies in A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 257

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In A there are no accidentals to the 2nd and 3rd R.H. chords. The missing accidentals were gradually added by the subsequent editions – in GE1 (→GE2) both accidentals to the 2nd chord were added, while in EE1 a  to the 3rd chord was also added (a  was not necessary due to the wrong pitch of the topmost note). The remaining editions – FE, EE3 and GE3 – include all the necessary accidentals.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Authentic corrections of FE , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in A

b. 265

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In the entire G major section of Variation V (bars 263-268), the pedalling markings are written in A rather carefully; however, it can be seen that more attention was paid to keeping the marks on the same level than to their correct alignment. In particular, the  marks in bar 265 are written before the bass D notes, as a result of which the preceding  marks had to be written sufficiently earlier. It did not lead to a significant inaccuracy at the end of bar 264; however, on the 2nd beat of bar 265, the  mark actually falls before the d-a-c1 quaver. Such an early pedal release could not have been intended by Chopin, since the  and  marks are written next to each other and almost certainly simply indicate a pedal change.
The notation of the editions is similar to the notation of A; however, it is less confusing due to different proportions of gaps between the notes and due to the size of the marks.
FESB overlooked the  sign on the 2nd beat.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Inaccuracies in A ,

b. 266

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

As in bar 265, the pedalling marks in the 1st half of the bar are inaccurately aligned in A – the first  mark is written as early as under the chord on the 2nd quaver in the bar, while the next  mark – directly behind it, still before the d1 crotchet in the top voice. However, as the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quavers in the bar are written very close to each other, one can guess that the inaccurate alignment resulted from lack of space; consequently, in the editions the notation was corrected in accordance with the analogous places and the pianistic sense.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions , Inaccuracies in A