Issues : Scope of dynamic hairpins

b. 14

composition: Op. 28 No. 16, Prelude in B♭ minor

in A

No sign in FC (→GE)

Longer  in FE (→EE)

..

The missing  hairpin in FC (→GE) resulted from an oversight of the copyist. In FE (→EE) the mark is longer due to it having been adjusted to the 2nd half of the bar.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Errors of FC

b. 15-16

composition: Op. 28 No. 16, Prelude in B♭ minor

2 half-bar long  in A (contextual interpretation→FEEE)

Different  in FC

Different  in GE

..

Both  marks in these bars have clearly different arms in A – the top arm begins in the middle of the bar, while the bottom one – on the 2nd beat. According to us, it is the top arm that should be regarded as reliable, since it was written first. This is how those marks were interpreted in FE (→EE) and the latter also in FC (inaccurately reproduced in GE). In FC (→GE) in b. 15 Fontana averaged the length of the arms.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Inaccuracies in GE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Unclear hairpins in A

b. 27-28

composition: Op. 28 No. 16, Prelude in B♭ minor

  in A, contextual interpretation

  in FC

  in FE (→EE)

  in GE

..

In both  marks in A the top arm is clearly longer than the bottom one. We adopt the range of the top arm, written first, in accordance with the more carefully written mark in similar b. 26. The relatively minor inaccuracies in the reproduction of the   marks in FC were exaggerated in GE, in which attempts were taken at placing the marks in such a way that they fill the entire bars. A similar manner, although only in b. 27, can also be seen in FE (→EE).

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information

issues: Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , GE revisions , Unclear hairpins in A , Inaccuracies in FC