Issues : Inaccuracies in GE
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 5, Prelude in D major
..
Except for GE, in the sources the placement of the pedal asterisks was quite accurately reproduced after A – the differences do not exceed a half of a semiquaver. In turn, the pedal in b. 5 in GE encompasses the entire bar, which deviates from the notation of FC to such an extent that one can assume a mistake, e.g. printing the from the previous bar. The mark in b. 6 was also reproduced inaccurately, moving it towards the end of the bar. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors in GE |
|||||||||||
b. 5-12
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major
..
The slur, encompassing the entire L.H. part in these bars, was reproduced incompletely in some sources, while GE reproduced it inaccurately:
A slur compliant with the notation of A is to be found in FE (→EE) only. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Errors of FC , Errors in CGS |
|||||||||||
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 20, Prelude in C minor
..
The notation of the slurs of FC, although generally compliant with A, may raise doubts – the ending of the slur in b. 5, which closes the line, only slightly goes beyond the bar line; therefore, the fact that the engraver of GE assumed that the slur ended in b. 5 does not actually come as a surprise, especially since the previous three slurs practically reached the bar lines. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE |
|||||||||||
b. 5
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In A, the pair of dynamic hairpins was written as close as possible to the top voice so that it was clear that it concerned this very voice; the slightly shortened mark is a result of lack of space. For reasons of clarity, in the main text we move the marks over the stave. In GE (→FE,FESB) the mark was prolonged, which could be considered acceptable; however, as a consequence, the mark seems to concern the R.H. bottom voice too, which is exactly what Chopin wanted to avoid in A. In the version of EE, the original notation is distorted even more (due to lack of access to A). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A |
|||||||||||
b. 5-6
|
composition: Op. 2, Variations, complete
..
In A, the short mark is placed in b. 6; however, since it reaches only the 1st crotchet in that bar, it is obvious that it concerns the f1-g1 step between the bars, which we give in the main text. The versions of editions are based on the interpretation of that mark performed by GE1, in which its right-hand ending is led to the 2nd beat of the bar, which has no basis in the notation of A. In spite of minor differences in the range of the marks in the editions, we regard them as different, since each may suggest a slightly different beginning or ending of the crescendo, while the mark in FESB actually resembles a reversed accent. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , EE inaccuracies , Inaccuracies in A |