data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d8754/d87542901ec59d50373e62fdeaa27658ebe3f57a" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/45570/45570130d3350cb196b62a10f420cd4f4b65d05c" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/37010/37010d435308e935082eee8514e9080629ef4a1b" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bd4d9/bd4d9cd00d2c1945c34810fe11464c16c7fb995e" alt=""
The sources differ in terms of whether the bottom R.H. note should be repeated or tied: c2 in b. 3-4 and 95-96 and g
1 in b. 7-8 and 99-100. The version with repeated note is earlier: in AI none of the four places features a tie. In AF, Chopin added a tie only the last time (b. 99-100), perhaps as a local variation. However, GE ties the respective notes in all four places, a version which in these circumstances seems naturally to be the latest one, written presumably in [AG]. The absence of slurs in FE (→EE) does not testify to Chopin's returning to the original concept, since he could have forgotten about the this change while proofreading FE.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations
notation: Rhythm