mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Authentic corrections of FE

b. 267

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 semiquavers in AsI & A (→GE→FESB)

Dotted rhythm in FE & EE
..

In the version of AsI and A (→GE→FESB) 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. 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

b. 274

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

2 R.H. f notes in AsI

5 R.H. f notes in A (→GE)

3 R.H. f notes in FE & FESB

4 R.H. f notes in EE

Our variant suggestion
..

A version of FE in which R.H. quavers on the 2nd beat do not include the f notes is most likely the result of Chopin's correction of its Stichvorlage, i.e. a copy of GE1. This version, which does not suggest striking these notes with both hands simultaneously, is given in the main text. A similar adjustment was made in EE, but there is no suggestion that Chopin had any influence on the text of this edition.
Noteworthy is the version of AsI, in which Chopin omitted the first f quaver on the 2nd beat (similarly to FE), and also deleted the f semiquavers on the 1st beat. The removal of these notes, which is a kind of development of the original idea to which Chopin eventually returned, is included in the main text in variant form.

category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information

issues: EE revisions , Accompaniment changes , Authentic corrections of FE , Revisions in FESB

b. 277

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

Neither AsI nor A (→GE→FE1,EE,FESB) include an accidental to the 7th semiquaver. The F major chord underlying this place is, however, thanks to the C7 chords present directly both before and after it, temporarily the tonic, which requires the use of e2, and not e2. This conclusion is also supported by bar 285 – in the orchestral version of this phrase all sources contain e2(3). The mistake, patent in this context, was, however, corrected only in the stage of proofreading FE2, probably at Chopin's request.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Authentic corrections of FE

b. 282-283

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

con o in 8va from b. 283 in A & FESB

con o in 8va from b. 282 in GE

8va from b. 283 in FE1 (→FE2)

con 8ves from b. 282 in EE, contextual interpretation
..

According to us, the only aim of the version introduced by Chopin into FE1 (→FE2) could have been to specify the notation of GE1, in which the indication begins a quaver too early, while in bar 287 it does not signal the transition to the simple octave sign, resulting from the change of texture to chordal. In other words, it is uncertain whether FE1 (→FE2) omitting the possibility to perform bars 283-286 and the two beats of bar 287 in octaves was not simply a compromise to avoid unnecessary complications of proofreading. Due to the above, in the main text we keep the variant notation of A and FESB. In EE the form of the indication is wrong: con 8ves in 8va; when interpreted literally, it would indicate that the phrase is to be performed both in octaves and an octave higher. In the content transcription (version "edited text") we omit the second, misleading part of the indication.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations

issues: EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Authentic corrections of FE