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 undoubtedly later version of the accompaniment written – with minor inaccuracies – in PE. The new shape of the accompaniment in this version was provided with slurs and the indication legato, probably by Chopin. The text of EF is a more precise notation of the earlier version, written in a partially draft form also in JC. In that last manuscript, it is three additional notes that draw attention; their meaning and relation to the remaining part of the notation is ambiguous. It could be, e.g., a draft of a new version of the bass line in this bar developed by Chopin.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources; Source & stylistic information
issues: Accompaniment changes, Inaccuracies in PE
notation: Pitch