



b. 4-5
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor
..
The addition performed in pencil in FES, hardly legible, especially in b. 4, most probably represents two digits (3) marking the fingering and written on the side. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
||||||||
b. 4
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 4, Prelude in E minor
..
In As the category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Source & stylistic information issues: Accidental below/above the note |
||||||||
b. 4
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 5, Prelude in D major
..
In FC (→GE1) the b1-a1 semiquavers are not separated as quavers. The patent mistake of the copyist was corrected in GE2 (→GE3). See also b. 36. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Errors of FC , Errors repeated in GE |
||||||||
b. 4
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
When interpreted literally, the version of A (→FC→GE1), in which the 4th demisemiquaver on the last beat of the bar is an a category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: Omissions to cancel alteration , GE revisions , Errors of A , FE revisions |
||||||||
b. 4-5
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 9, Prelude in E major
..
The slurs in A are clearly divided, hence it is unclear what confused the engraver of FE (→EE) and made him not take into consideration that division. The slurring of FC is obscure – the slur in b. 4, at the end of the line, does not suggest a continuation, yet the slur at the beginning of b. 5 clearly does. Consequently, it is also GE that feature a continuous slur here. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Inaccuracies in FC |