Issues : Omission of current key accidentals
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 in b. 10 is not indispensable due to the presence of corresponding sharps in the L.H., i.e. raising c1 to c1). 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. 16-17). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of FC |
|
b. 16-17
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
In FCI there are no naturals lowering f2 to f2 in these bars. It must be an inaccuracy of notation – see the comment on b. 18-22. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources |
|
b. 18-21
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 3, Prelude in G major
..
In FCI there is no lowering f to f in b. 18; it is also absent in b. 19-22, in which the L.H. part is marked as a repetition of b. 18. Chopin's patent oversight is evidenced by the cautionary before f in b. 23. This situation affects the evaluation of the notation of b. 16-17 – it is also there that we are almost certainly dealing with an oversight of naturals (in the R.H.). category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources |