mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description
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
Undo Clear

b. 268

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Slurs delimiting triplets in A (→GE→FE1,EE)

No triplet slurs in FESB
..

In accordance with the General Editorial Principles, p. 16, in the main text we omit the 4 slurs present in the majority of the sources; these slurs are part of the triplet markings, and they unnecessarily overlap the articulation slurs of the same range. The slurs were also omitted by FESB.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: FE revisions , Triplet slurs

b. 268

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

No marks in A

Accent on d1 in GE (→FE)

2 accents in EE
..

It is highly likely that Chopin overlooked the accents, since they are present in the analogous figures both in the previous bars and the next one. It is difficult to assume that Chopin would have wanted to forgo accents, especially the one on f1, which is crucial for the modulation to the key of the final polonaise. The transition to a new page in A (the discussed bar opens the page) was conducive to distraction. The indicated harmonic context suggests that it is also the addition of an accent only over d1 in GE (→FE) that seems to be a mistake or misunderstanding in the implementation of the proofreading corrections. Therefore, in the main text we include the revision of EE, which gives both accents, over d1 and f1.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions

b. 268

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

in A

cresc. in GE (→FE,EE)
..

As in bar 266, in GE (→FE,EE) the  hairpin encompassing the cresc. indication was overlooked, which could not have been authorised by Chopin.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: GE revisions

b. 268-269

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 staccato dots in A

Wedge in GE1 (→FE,GE2→FESB)

2 wedges in EE

3 wedges in GE3
..

In A the staccato marks over the bass G notes are clearly dots in this bar, and not wedges, as was the case before and as was conveyed by GE and the remaining editions. It was not an inaccuracy of notation, since in both places one can see traces of corrections (erasures). In the next bars, the bass notes are not marked staccato at all, which may suggest that the articulation should get gradually longer (milder?) as the modulation progresses and as the music calms down.
The absence of the second mark in GE1 (→FE,GE2→FESB) probably resulted from an oversight (or the engraver was uncertain which mark to apply). The additions in EE (the 2nd wedge in bar 268) and GE3 (the 2nd wedge in bar 268 and the wedge over the first F in bar 269) were arbitrary decisions of the revisers.

category imprint: Differences between sources

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

b. 269

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

In the main text we add a cautionary  to F. The accidental was also added by FE (it cannot be ruled out that at Chopin's request) and by EE3, probably on the basis of a comparison with FE.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions

issues: EE revisions , Cautionary accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE , FE revisions