The notation of the repeat of bars 53-60 is inaccurate in the sources; returning after the 1st volta of bar 60 to bar 53, we come across a sustained octave f1-f2. We leave that notation as it is, because the formally correct notation is longer and more graphically complicated, and the described inaccuracy of the authentic notation does not hinder the correct reading of the composer's intentions. It is not unlikely that in GE1 (→FE) the missing ending of the tie sustaining f2 in bar 53 is the result of proofing aimed at removing the ambiguity: finishing bar 52, the performer sees the sustained f2 before he or she turns the page, yet on returning to bar 53 after bar 60 sees only the struck f2 on a new page. However, a different, formally complete notation of sustaining f1 in the left hand speaks against that hypothesis. In EE1 (→EE2) the tie sustaining f2 was omitted and in EE3 – supplemented. The correct notation of the tied note can also be found in GE2 (→GE3).
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources
issues: EE revisions, Errors in GE
notation: Rhythm