Issues : Errors in FE
b. 6-7
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The absence of a slur is certainly an error by the engraver of FE. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE |
|||||||||||
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. 16
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
FE (→EE1) omitted the dot prolonging the crotchet b1. The error was corrected in EE2, the remaining sources also have the correct text. category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources issues: EE revisions , Errors in FE , Errors repeated in EE |
|||||||||||
b. 42
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
In FE the 2nd semiquaver in both figures is an erroneous c note, whereas in EE – most probably as a result of revision of this clearly false version – e. The version of EE, although possible in terms of harmony, is pianistically improbable. In turn, the pencilled correction of c to A written in FES, compliant with the version of A (→FC→GE), may come from Chopin. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Annotations in teaching copies , EE revisions , Errors in FE , Terzverschreibung error , Annotations in FES |
|||||||||||
b. 59
|
composition: Op. 28 No. 24, Prelude in D minor
..
The omitted staccato markings in the editions must be oversights. category imprint: Differences between sources issues: Errors in FE , Errors in EE , Errors in GE |