|
b. 2-18
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 6, Prelude in B minor
..
Initially, Chopin marked the two-quaver motifs with an accent and a slur – as he did in b. 1 – also in b. 2-6, 11-16 and 18. All those markings were then crossed out – after the three accent/slur combinations in b. 1, Chopin left only one more at the end of b. 22, which, actually, gave it a special meaning. category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A |
|||||
|
b. 2
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
In A (→FC) b. 2 is marked with •/• signs as a repetition of b. 1. This raises doubts about whether and which performance indications are to be included in b. 2 (except for the tempo/character marking, of course) – FE (→EE) repeated pedalling markings and slurs, but omitted accents. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Abbreviated notation of A |
|||||
|
b. 2
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major
..
Fontana's mistake in the interpretation of the slurs of A could have been caused by a slur from the next page of A clearly showing through the paper – a fragment of a slur of the Prelude in C category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
|||||
|
b. 2
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major
..
The version of GE2 is a result of an arbitrary revision, provoked by a mistake committed in GE1 in the next triplet, i.e. a c category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions |
|||||
|
b. 2
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 10, Prelude in C♯ minor
..
In FE1 the 4th and 5th semiquavers of the bar are b1-a1. It must be a mistake – it is likely that the engraver was influenced by the structure of the previous and the next two figures. The error was rectified in FE2; it is also all the remaining sources that include the correct version, analogous to b. 6 and 14. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , FE revisions |
Minor seems to combine the two slurs of 
