|
b. 7-10
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
The rhythm written down in FCI in b. 7 and 9 is most probably the first version. It is evidenced by corrections stemming from that same version, visible in A in b. 9. Therefore, one can conclude that FCI contains an earlier version also in b. 8 and 10 and generally later in the Prelude (b. 16-25). category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Main-line changes |
|||||||||
|
b. 7-10
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
FCI does not contain any accidentals in the R.H. part in these bars. The missing sharps in b. 7 and 9 are a patent inaccuracy (formally speaking, a cautionary category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of FC |
|||||||||
|
b. 7-9
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
FCI contains much more accents – in bars 7 and 9, as well as 12, 16-18, 20 and 22. category imprint: Differences between sources |
|||||||||
|
b. 7-9
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
Nothing indicates that the fingering of EE could be authentic. What is more, a mistake was most probably committed in b. 8 – in the middle of the bar, the b-a notes should be, apparently, played with the fingers 2-1, as they were in the previous bar, in an analogous place. In the copied fingering, it is, however, impossible to reach d at the beginning of the 4th group without crossing the fingers, which should have been marked. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
|||||||||
|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
Arpeggio in EE resulted from a mistake of the engraver of EE1, who placed it in b. 7 instead of b. 8. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in EE |
in b. 10 is not indispensable due to the presence of corresponding sharps in the L.H., i.e. raising c1 to c
1). Such an incomplete notation was probably present already in the lost autograph that served as the basis for this copy, since it seems unlikely that the copyist would selectively omit marks on the top stave (see also b. 
in bar 7 in 
