mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in GE

b. 198

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Tied quaver e1 in AsI, contextual interpretation

Crotchet e1 in A & GE2 (→GE3,FESB)

Quaver e1 in GE1 (→EE)

Quaver & demisemiquaver e1 in FE

Completed FE version suggested by the editors
..

As with b. 182, in the main text we give the version with e1 repeated at the end of the bar, introduced in the stage of proofreading FE. At the same time, we do not accept the fact that the e1 crotchet played in the middle of the bar should be shortened (to a quaver) – it is probably a mistake or revision by GE1 (→FE,EE), which was corrected by GE2 (→GE3,FESB). However, we add a dot extending the a1 semiquaver, since we are convinced that its absence in FE resulted from inaccurate or simplified proofreading.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions; Corrections & alterations

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

b. 216

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 staccato dots in A, probable reading

No marks in remaining sources

8 staccato dots suggested by the editors
..

Both dots visible in A over the first two R.H. semiquavers are quite far from the notes and clearly not in the same line (vertically speaking); therefore, one wonders whether they are not accidental spots. However, the dots are clear and regular, while the shifts with respect to the notes they probably concern are similar both in terms of distance and direction. Therefore, we assume that they are staccato dots with which Chopin indicated a slightly different type of articulation – most probably lighter – of the  semiquavers. In the main text, for the sake of clarity, we suggest adding dots in the entire 1st half of the bar.
The markings were not included by GE1 and the remaining editions, perhaps due to the atypical placement described above. 

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in GE

b. 231

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

c1-e1-f1 in A

c1-f1 in GE (→FE,EE,FESB)
..

The presence of e1 in A is obvious; nevertheless, it seems highly likely that it was overlooked by the engraver of GE – the notehead is slightly thinner than the adjacent ones; what is more, it is misplaced, since it is directly under f1, and not to the left of it, as required by the rule (Chopin would generally write seconds in such a way all his life).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 237

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In GE1 (→FE1,GE2), the  raising b1 to b1 is before the 1st third. Interestingly enough, it is not a common mistake but a wrong revision, since the traces of corrections in print (visible particularly in GE2) reveal that initially the text was printed correctly, with a  before the 3rd semiquaver. In FE2, EE, FESB and GE3, the  was moved to the right place, while in EE another natural was added, a cautionary one to g1 in the 1st third. We include this cautionary accidental also in the main text, hence our text is identical to version of EE.

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

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

b. 242-247

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Wedges in b. 242 & 247 in A (→GE1→EE,GE2→FESB)

Wedge in b. 247 in FE

Wedge in b. 242 in GE3

Wedges in b. 242, 244 & 247 suggested by the editors
..

At the beginning of bars 242, 244 and 247 some – in bar 244 all – sources omit the wedges over the 1st L.H. octave. These are the engravers' mistakes or Chopin's oversight. We provide all 3 marks in the main text.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE