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=""
In the main text we give the A version (→GE), analogous to the version in bar 168. The FE version could be considered a Terzverschreibung mistake if it were not for the fact that it is musically reasonable and could have been introduced by Chopin into [FC] or while proofreading FE1. Such swinging motion of the figuration topmost notes can often be seen in Chopin's pieces, cf., e.g. the Variations in B, Op. 12, bars 192-195, Bolero, Op. 19, bars 155-167, Sonata in B minor, Op. 58, I mov., bars 41-47. Therefore, this version can be considered an equal variant.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: Authentic corrections of FE
notation: Pitch