



Slurs
b. 84
|
composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major
..
The missing slur over the L.H. top voice seems to be an oversight if we take into account the respective slurs in bars 81-83 and 85-86. Moreover, it cannot be excluded that the engraver (or Chopin in [A]) omitted the slur, as there was no place for it. Therefore, in the main text we suggest adding a slur to fill the gap. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 85-86
|
composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major
..
Taking into account the generally complete slurring in this variation, the absence of a slur in FE (→GE,EE) is supposed to be considered an oversight. Therefore, in the main text we suggest a corresponding addition. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 86-87
|
composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major
..
Taking into account the slurs over all subsequent similar motifs, we consider the slur added – most probably by Chopin – to FEO to be a correction of a mistake and put it directly in the main text. category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Errors in FE , Annotations in FEO |
||||||
b. 86
|
composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major
..
According to us, it is highly likely that the slur, perhaps inaccurate in [A], was misinterpreted by the FE engraver (→GE,EE). Leaving out one semiquaver contradicts the general legato indication, provided by Chopin at the beginning of this variation (cf. also the slurs in similar motifs in bar 69, 79 and 82). Therefore, in the main text we provide a longer slur. category imprint: Editorial revisions |
||||||
b. 88
|
composition: Op. 12, Variations in B♭ major
..
According to us, the ending of the FE slur is inaccurate, as there is no reason for it not to encompass the last note of the phrase – cf. the L.H. slur and the slur in the ending of the theme (bar 58). category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |