mUltimate Chopin

Op. 2, Variations, complete

Text Compare Notes Sources Description

Issues : Errors in EE

b. 45-46

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

Different accents in A, literal reading

Long accents in A, possible interpretation

Short accents in GE1 (→FE,GE2→FESB)

Short accent in b. 46 in GE3

Vertical accent in b. 46 in EE
..

It is uncertain whether Chopin meant the accents over the B1-B and B-b octaves to be long or short, since despite a strictly analogous situation, in A the marks differ in length. In the main text we suggest long accents, since the accent of A in b. 46 can be considered long – it is also the accent over e2 in the R.H. that is shorter than its counterpart in b. 45. The version of A, when interpreted literally, and the short accents of GE1 (→FE,GE2→FESB) can be, however, regarded as equivalent variants. In the latter version, the difference between the L.H. accents (short) and the R.H. accents (long) constitutes a detail corresponding to the difference between the length of the accentuated L.H. () and R.H. () notes as well as to the difference between the liveliness and nature of the L.H. motifs and the R.H. top voice.
The omission of the first accent in EE and GE3 could be ascribed to the engravers' inattention or their reluctance to obscure the image with a mark on the stave, between the notes. The change of the accent font in EE is a specific manner of that edition.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE , Inaccuracies in A

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. 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

b. 255

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

As far as the naturals raising e to e in the 2nd half of bar 255 are concerned, in A Chopin was satisfied with accidentals to the L.H. chord (e1) and the 3rd demisemiquaver (e3). The remaining 3 naturals necessary later in the passage were added by GE (→FE,EE).
In EE the  to the L.H. chord, which was placed slightly too low in GE1, was interpreted as a natural raising d1 to d1.
In A the  to e3 is written too low, at the pitch of c3. Such inaccuracies are often to be found in Chopin's autographs, generally – as is the case here – with no influence on the interpretation of the text.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Accidentals in different octaves , Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in EE , GE revisions , Accidental below/above the note , Inaccuracies in A

b. 273

composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete

..

The second note in the L.H. part in AsI, A (→GE→FE) and EE3 is a dotted quaver, as a result of which the bar is a semiquaver too short. In the full, orchestral version of this tutti, the cello (and bassoon) phrase starts from the beginning of the bar with a dotted crotchet, which could have suggested to Chopin that it was also in the version for one piano, after shifting the beginning to the 2nd quaver, that the new value should be dotted. The mistake, easy to detect, was noticed and corrected only by FESB. By contrast, in EE1 (→EE2) the dot prolonging this note was left out – it could have been a failed attempt at correcting this mistake.

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

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