b. 28
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
|||||||||
b. 30
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
The mark in A is clearly shorter than the respective one in analog. b. 28, hence one could interpret it as a long accent. According to us, it is more likely that, in the face of the preceding it mark, Chopin meant a diminuendo hairpin. In the main text we keep the slight difference in the range of the marks between those bars, visible in A. Both FC (→GE) and FE (→EE) clearly extended the marks, whereas FC (→GE) also shortened the mark. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Scope of dynamic hairpins , Inaccuracies in FC |
|||||||||
b. 31-32
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
The division of the slur between the bars must be a mistake of the engraver, probably misled by the shortness of the bars in A, written in an abridged manner. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
|||||||||
b. 32-33
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
Looking at the notation of A, one can have doubts whether in b. 33 Chopin wanted to continue the preceding slur or start a new one. The change of texture and the mark, emphasizing the minim chord, are arguments for starting a new slur. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
|||||||||
b. 33
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 8, Prelude in F♯ minor
..
category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |