|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
Chopin started crossing out and correcting the R.H. part; afterwards, he decided to rewrite the entire bar, on the staves above. The changes probably concerned two elements:
category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Main-line changes |
|||
|
b. 7
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
Although the revisers of EE and GE2 used semiquavers in the group of small notes probably after analogous b. 25, Chopin wrote those notes as semiquavers also in the discussed bar – see the adjacent note. It cannot be ruled out that the change of semiquavers to quavers resulted from distraction at the time of copying this bar. Therefore, the version with semiquavers may be considered an acceptable variant of notation (actually, both versions indicate the same performance). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , GE revisions |
|||
|
b. 8
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
One can see a crossed-out semiquaver rest between the last two R.H. notes in A. Chopin performed the same correction in analogous b. 26, which confirms that it was only just at the stage of writing A that Chopin forwent the division of this motif into two parts. See also b. 46. category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Main-line changes |
|||
|
b. 9-25
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
In b. 9 and 20-25 the L.H. part in A (→FC) is marked with •/• signs as repetition of the preceding bar. The abridged notation is used in the manuscripts also to mark the 2nd half of the bar in b. 11-15 and 17-19. In b. 21-25 a similar notation was also used in FE, where the second halves were marked with a / sign. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: FE revisions |
|||
|
b. 10-11
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The crossings-out visible in A reveal an earlier version of the L.H. figures; in that version the 4th note of each of them was like the second and not the first. Analogous corrections are also visible in b. 55 and 70, which may mean that in the working notation of the Prelude, which Chopin used while writing A, the entire L.H. part was based on such figures, and the change to the final version was not marked at all or only signalised, e.g. at the beginning of the piece. The aforementioned corrections would therefore suggest that the composer temporarily lost his focus while modifying the figuration at the time of rewriting. category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Accompaniment changes |
;
