Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
|
b. 3
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The missing accent in FC (→GE) resulted from the distraction of the copyist, who overlooked the marks from the entire first line of A. In FE (→EE) this long accent was reproduced as a half-bar diminuendo hairpin, which more or less corresponds to the length of the mark in A, but does not include the fact that it should be placed under the a1 crotchet only. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors of FC |
|||||||||
|
b. 4-7
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
As was the case with b. 3, the missing dynamic hairpin in FC (→GE) resulted from the inadvertence of the copyist, who overlooked the marks from the entire first line of A (b. 1-6) and b. 7 (in the case of b. 7, deciphering the mark in A is actually hampered by the crossings-out, clearly visible from the other side of the page). category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
|||||||||
|
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 |
|||||||||
|
b. 18
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
As was the case with b. 3, in A the long accent is placed right under the note; however, in FE it was moved to the right, hence it could be interpreted as a category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Long accents , EE revisions , Inaccuracies in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE |
|||||||||
|
b. 22-24
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The missing category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors of FC |
in 
