Issues : FE revisions
b. 1-2
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give the slur of FE (→EE), since the vast majority of subsequent slurs, present in a similar context, is led to the 1st quaver in the next bar in A – out of 13 slurs in b. 1-12 and 15, it is only the slurs in b. 1, 8 and 10 that end on the 6th quaver; two (in b. 6 and 9) are ambiguous. We consider all the above slurs to be inaccurate, since the differences in the range of slurs are not related to the structure of motifs, e.g. the shorter slurs in b. 1 and 8 are opposed by the longer ones in similar figures in b. 2 and 7. Moreover, in A one can see corrections – the slurs in b. 4-5 and 5-6 were being extended (in b. 3-4 probably too). Along with the crossed-out staccato dot at the beginning of b. 2, it may indicate that the concept of markings of those figures changed from to . Consequently, the aforementioned shorter slurs would be uncorrected elements of the initial slurring. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Corrections in A , FE revisions , Omitted correction of an analogous place , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||
b. 8-11
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major
..
When interpreted literally, 3 consecutive slurs of A reach only the last quaver in the bar; moreover, the starting point of the slur in b. 9 is also not entirely clear (we assume that it is the 2nd quaver). Due to the reasons discussed in b. 1-2, we consider them to be inaccurate; in the main text we generally adopt the slurs of FE (→EE), compliant with the manner in which Chopin would correct in A some slurs in similar figures. In b. 9-10 the notation of the topmost L.H. notes on the top stave and writing them closer to the b1 minim opens an additional interpretation of the L.H. slur as reaching that minim. We include that possibility in the main text, regarding the version of FE (→EE) as an equal variant. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Inaccurate slurs in A , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC |
||||||||||||||
b. 19-23
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major
..
In A Chopin overlooked a few necessary flats in the R.H. part: in b. 19 d2, in b. 21 d3 and g2, in b. 22 d2 and d3. FC added only the first in b. 21; in addition, the copyist overlooked the of g2 in b. 23. FE also added only some of the necessary flats, next to d2(3) in b. 21-22, and – which is puzzling – also overlooked the of g2 in b. 23. GE and EE added all necessary accidentals. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Accidentals in different octaves , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC , Fontana's revisions , Inaccuracies in A , Errors repeated in FE |
||||||||||||||
b. 21-22
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major
..
In these bars Chopin did not enter any accidentals into the L.H. part at all. All necessary flats were added in FC (→GE); they are also in EE. In turn, FE added accidentals only before the fifths that open the bars. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , FE revisions , Fontana's revisions , Errors repeated in FE |
||||||||||||||
b. 33-36
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major
..
In the main text we give a contextual interpretation of the slurring of A – we consider the bottom slur in b. 33, which closes the line, to be inaccurate, since it is too short (like in a few other places, see b. 1). The clearly extended slurs in subsequent analogous bars undoubtedly reveal Chopin's intention. However, this notation was not reproduced correctly in any of the sources, which may be explained by revision (in all cases), an erroneous interpretation (FC) or carelessness (GE). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness issues: Errors in FE , Inaccurate slurs in A , Errors in GE , FE revisions , Inaccuracies in FC , Uncertain slur continuation |