mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : EE revisions

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

No chord in AsI

Minim c1 in A (→GE1→GE2)

Minim a1 in FE

Minim c1 with rest in EE

Semibreve a1 in FESB

Minims f & c1 in GE3

3 dotted minims suggested by the editors
..

Chopin would often differentiate the rhythmic values of a chord written on one stem. However, in this case one could have doubts whether the missing dot to c1 in A (→GE1→GE2,FESB) did not result from distraction. A possible earlier release of this key does not affect the sound, since the pedal pressed at the beginning of the bar is still to be held. Another issue could be the e1 crotchet: making it easier to play it or indicating that the e1 note falls already after two and not three crotchets. None of the above reasons seems plausible enough, hence in the main text we add a respective dot. In the other editions, the notation of this chord contains mistakes or revisions:

  • In FE the dot of a1 was overlooked, yet a dot to c1 was added;
  • EE added a crotchet rest after the c1 minim;
  • in FESB the dotted a1 minim written on the top stave is devoid of a stem, hence it looks like a semibreve (in this edition there is no difference between the minim and semibreve noteheads);
  • GE3 overlooked the dots to c1 and f.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors in GE

b. 94

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

leggier. in A (→GE→FE,FESB)

leggiero in EE
..

In the main text we keep the ambiguous Chopinesque leggier. abbreviation, since all its possible explanations have a similar meaning. We regard the leggier(a)mente adverbial form as the most likely possibility. The equivalent leggiero adjective form (present in EE) includes as many characters as the abbreviation used, hence it is unlikely that it could have been intended by Chopin. 

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions

b. 108

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

e2 in AsI, A (→GE→FE,FESB) & EE2 (→EE3)

e2 in EE1 (→EE2)
..

Contrary to the situation in b. 103, in A (→GE→FESB) there is no cautionary  to e2. A flat was added in FE, perhaps at Chopin's request, whereas in EE1 a  was inserted here, raising e2 to e2. This version, possible in itself, must be erroneous, which is proven by – aside from the compliant version of the remaining sources – the comparison with analogous b. 104, 120 and 124. This erroneous revision (or maybe simply a mistake) was corrected only just in EE3, where the  was changed to a .

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE , Cautionary accidentals , FE revisions