In bar 71 and 73, in FE the e quaver was printed under g1 in the R.H., as if it were supposed to be a semiquaver with the missing flag. A version with a semiquaver would be possible, but a non-simultaneous entry of the middle voices (e and c
1) defining the new chord is highly unlikely. Therefore, we assume that it is the rhythmic value of the notes that is correct, and not their position. In GE only the mistake in bar 71 was corrected, while in EE in both places the synchronisation of the parts of both hands is inaccurate, with the difference in bar 71 being marginal, as a result of which the notation seems correct, whereas in bar 73 the shift of the e quaver is distinct enough for it to be reproduced as it was done in FE (in the version "transcript").
Compare the passage in the sources»
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Interpretations within context; Differences between sources
issues: EE revisions, Inaccuracies in GE, Inaccuracies in FE, GE revisions, EE inaccuracies
notation: Rhythm