|
b. 10-16
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
EE1 has no category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in EE |
|||
|
b. 12-13
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The ending of the R.H. slur underwent an evolution in A – three versions are written, out of which two were crossed out. It was most probably the longer ending of a continuous slur that was written first: category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A |
|||
|
b. 12
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
To the main text we adopt the notation of the trill with a wavy line, in spite of the fact that in A Chopin wrote only category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Editorial revisions |
|||
|
b. 13-14
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
In A one can see a crossed-out tie holding the c1 minim to the beginning of the roulade in the next bar. Chopin introduced similar corrections in both analogous places, i.e. b. 18 and 31-32. category imprint: Corrections & alterations; Source & stylistic information issues: Corrections in A , Deletions in A , Main-line changes |
|||
|
b. 14
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The missing accent in FE (→EE1) is most probably an oversight of the engraver. The mark was added in EE2, probably on the basis of a comparison with GE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE |
signs in the middle of bar 10 and at the end of bars 15-16. These are probably oversights by the engraver. Only the first one was corrected in 
. It is an example of a tenuto-slur, used by Chopin on a number of occasions to emphasise the lingering of the last note encompassed with a slur. Chopin then added a very short ending of the slur over the a1 crotchet and a new slur under the f1-c1 fourth motif, while crossing out the further part of the initial slur: 
. Eventually, it was also the "fourth" slur that was crossed out, whereas the top one was prolonged with a distinct, thicker line, which reached only the c1 minim, which was repeated in all the remaining sources: 
. We also see crossed-out slurs in two out of three analogous phrases – in b. 
in 
in 
