data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/73ecd/73ecd80c88ad44c39f3711b6bcc33ca9e1021267" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/75013/75013441a15e45e6f391d55c49aaf803f3dff8a4" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/57140/571405c7057401412640722d57e0f4262876af22" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/3075f/3075f31e8b155e01785c3a53896ad205598099cf" alt=""
GE1
compare
We consider the missing slurs over the descending octave motifs to be an inaccuracy – cf. the slurs concerning the previous two motifs. The omission of 2 other L.H. slurs in bars 129-131 justifies the introduction of respective additions directly into the main text.
The GE version is most probably a mistake or revision.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: Inaccuracies in GE
notation: Slurs