Select: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Importance
All
Important
Main


b. 266

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

accelerando in AsI

No indication in Af & A (→GEFE,EE)

..

The term "accelerando" is used in #AI instead of dynamic indications. In the editors' opinion, this does not necessarily mean that Chopin did not anticipate dynamic nuances here when writing this score – see the note below. It can also be assumed that the lack of this instruction in the version prepared for publication does not mean giving up agogic freedom when playing this figure – the difference in markings is rather a result of the emphasis placed on a different aspect of execution. Therefore, we do not treat these indications as mutually exclusive.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

b. 266

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

The term legatiss. is not present in AsI, but in Af it is already marked on the 4th beat, between the staves. Chopin wrote leg[g]ierissi[mo] and leg there – the latter probably meaning legatiss. – which seem to have been replaced by probably later added dynamic cues, such as in A. The order in which the individual instructions were entered is not entirely certain, but leggieriss., which does not appear among the terms in the final version, has been clearly deleted.

category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

b. 267

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Rhythm in AsI

Rhythm in Af & A (→GEFE,EE)

Our alternative suggestion

Another our suggestion

..

In the majority of the sources, the R.H. text on the 1st beat of the bar contains a rhythmic mistake. However, we give the text in this form, since it is impossible to say which elements are written incorrectly and therefore which rhythm Chopin meant. In the main text we give the version of AsI, since it is undoubtedly authentic, rhythmically correct and natural, both aesthetically and pianistically. However, as Chopin did not repeat the version of AsI, he could have wanted to change it then. The alternative versions are two possible reconstructions of a rhythm that could have been intended by Chopin.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: Rhythmic errors , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE

b. 267

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 semiquavers in AsI & A (→GEFESB)

Dotted rhythm in FE & EE

..

In the version of AsI and A (→GEFESB) the dot prolonging g1 refers to the quaver and indicates that it should be held to c2 (actually to g1, which must be played again). In the version of FE1 and EE this dot refers to – also or only – the semiquaver, as a result of which the next note must be shortened. It is difficult to say whether the emergence of the other version in FE1 resulted from Chopin's proofreading or from the interpretation of the slightly misleading Chopinesque notation by the engraver or reviser, as in EE.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Authentic corrections of FE , FE revisions , Dotted or even rhythm , Inaccuracies in A

b. 267

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In A (→GEFE,EE) the penultimate note is prolonged to the value of a quaver, which must be a mistake in this context.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Editorial revisions

issues: Rhythmic errors , Errors of A , Errors repeated in GE , Errors repeated in FE , Errors repeated in EE