Issues : Errors of FC
|
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. 7-10
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
An earlier version of slurring linked to the initial rhythm – see the note on rhythm. It is also there that we discuss the mistakes in the reproduction of the slurs of A, committed both in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC |
||||||
|
b. 7-8
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 10, Prelude in C♯ minor
..
The small slur combining the trilled crotchet with the quaver that opens the next bar was overlooked both in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors of FC |
||||||
|
b. 7-8
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 23, Prelude in F major
..
In spite of the unequivocal notation of A, the L.H. slurs were reproduced erroneously both in FC (→GE) and FE (→EE). Fontana omitted both slurs of A; however, he provided the triplets in b. 8 with conventional slurs (he also did it in b. 12). In turn, it is difficult to say what could have prompted the engraver of FE to combine the slurs, which is contrary to the notation of A. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
||||||
|
b. 7-12
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major
..
The missing L.H. slurs in FC (→GE) beginning in b. 7 and 11 (as well as 12 – see note in this bar) most probably resulted from the copyist's inadvertence. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
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 
