Issues : Errors in GE

b. 1

composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major

Staccato dot in A (→FC)

No mark in FE (→EE) & GE

..

In the main text we include the staccato dot placed in A quite high above the 1st quaver; perhaps this is the reason it was overlooked in FE (→EE). On the basis of the preserved photograph, it is difficult to conclude whether the dot was copied in FC. According to us, it is likely that it is between the ledger lines, poorly legible due to the beam in b. 41, visible through the other page.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources

issues: Errors in FE , Errors in GE

b. 23

composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major

c2-a2-c3 twice in A (→FEEE), contextual interpretation

c2-c3 twice in FC (→GE1)

d2-d3 & c2-c3 in GE2 (→GE3)

..

In the main text we give the version of A (→FEEE), which does not raise any doubts, in spite of the missing  lowering a2 to a2 (it was added in EE). In the notation of FC, perhaps intentionally compliant with A, the middle notes (a2) in the grace note and the following crotchet are, however, completely imperceptible, hence they were not printed in GE1. The version of GE2 (→GE3) is an arbitrary revision; originally, it was modelled after the authentic version of b. 31, yet it was implemented inattentively – the change of pitch of the grace note made the following crotchet lose the flats lowering c2-c3 to c2-c3, which should have been added in that situation.

category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions , Errors in GE , GE revisions , Omission of current key accidentals , Errors of A , Errors repeated in FE

b. 33-36

composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major

5 slurs in A, literal reading

5 slurs in A, contextual interpretation

5 slurs in FC

3 slurs in FE (→EE)

2 slurs in GE

..

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

b. 50

composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major

A1 in A (→FC,FEEE)

A1-A in GE

..

It is difficult to indicate which element of notation of FC could have misled the engraver of GE1. The absence of a respective correction in GE2 proves that the revision was implemented with the aim of detecting manifest errors; compliance with the Stichvorlage was not the main goal.

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE

b. 55

composition: Op. 28 No. 21, Prelude in B♭ major

c in A (→FC,FEEE) & GE2 (→GE3)

B in GE1

..

The version of GE1 must be erroneous; it was corrected in GE2 (→GE3).

category imprint: Differences between sources

issues: Errors in GE , GE revisions