Slurs
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »
|
b. 27-28
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The slurring of A in b. 26-27 is ambiguous – the slur in b. 26 (ending the line), led over the notes, certainly suggests that it should be continued, which is, however, not confirmed by the beginning of b. 27, in which only the initial slur is finished (it was crossed out in b. 26), under the notes. The fact that the ending of the bottom slur was not crossed out and that the top one was not continued proves that Chopin did not control the slurs in b. 27 after having introduced the corrections into b. 26. According to us, the aim of those changes was to combine the new slur in b. 26 with a slur running further, until the end of the phrase in b. 31, in accordance with the unequivocal slurring of an analogous phrase in b. 8-13. Therefore, in the main text we suggest one slur over b. 26-31. It seems that such an interpretation is confirmed by the entry in FED – the mark over the 2nd half of b. 27 may indicate that the slur should be prolonged, i.e. it should start earlier, from the tied dotted b1 quaver (consequently, we obtain a notation equivalent to a continuous slur). category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , Annotations in FED , Inaccurate slurs in A , Errors of FC , Uncertain slur continuation |
|||||||||||
|
b. 30-35
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
In b. 30-31 and 34-35 the slurs in A were initially broken over the semiquaver rest. category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A |
|||||||||||
|
b. 38-39
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
In this case, it is difficult to attribute the different slurring of FC (→GE) to Fontana's carelessness – he may have assumed that Chopin meant such slurs, separated over the rest. The unequivocal slurs of A probably referred to the initial version of the melody (without rest), yet Chopin did not change them after having corrected the rhythm; moreover, in a few other places, he even combined slurs over rests – see b. 30-31 and 34-35. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Fontana's revisions |
|||||||||||
|
b. 50-51
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
In A the slur in b. 50, which ends the line, suggests that it should be continued, which is, however, not confirmed by the new slur in b. 51. According to us, it is the ending of the slur in b. 50 that is inaccurate; this is how it was interpreted by Fontana in FC (→GE). The version of FE (→EE) may be considered an alternative interpretation of the ambiguous notation of A. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources |
|||||||||||
|
b. 56-57
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The slurring of FC (→GE) is one of a few distinct inaccuracies of the copyist, and yet difficult to explain – cf. b. 27-28, 38-39 or 58. In A the slur starting in b. 57 is a tenuto-slur, according to us, and this is how we reproduce it in the main text. At the same time, we include the ambiguous curved line of A at the beginning of b. 58; the shape thereof resembles a tie, but it is placed at the height of a slur. In FE the curved line was not prolonged beyond the a1 crotchet, whereas in EE, due to a routine shift of the mark to the side of noteheads, it became a tie. category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors of FC , Tenuto slurs |
- « Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next »