Page: 
Source: 
p. 5, b. 130-160
p. 1, b. 1-30
p. 2, b. 31-58
p. 3, b. 59-94
p. 4, b. 95-129
p. 5, b. 130-160
p. 6, b. 161-193
p. 7, b. 194-224
p. 8, b. 225-252
p. 9, b. 253-287
GC - Gutmann's Copy
Main text
GC - Gutmann's Copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Second impression of FE
FE3 - Third impression of FE
FE4 - Fourth impression of FE
FESch - Scherbatoff Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE
Select notes: 
Category
All
Graphic ambiguousness
Interpretations within context
Differences between sources
Editorial revisions
Corrections & alterations
Source & stylistic information
Notation
All
Pitch
Rhythm
Slurs
Articulation, Accents, Hairpins
Verbal indications
Pedalling
Fingering
Ornaments
Shorthand & other
Differences
No differences
GC - Gutmann's Copy
FE - French edition
FE1 - First French edition
FE2 - Second impression of FE
FE3 - Third impression of FE
FE4 - Fourth impression of FE
FESch - Scherbatoff Copy
FES - Stirling copy
FED - Dubois copy
GE - German edition
GE1 - First German edition
GE2 - Corrected impression of GE
EE - English edition
EE1 - First English edition
EE2 - Revised impression of EE
Importance
All
Important
Main
Prezentacja
Select 
copy link PDF GC - Gutmann's Copy


  b. 140

No c1 in GC & FE (→EE1)

c1 in GE & EE2

The absence of the c1 note is most probably a result of the unclear notation of [A]. It is indicated by the comparison with analogous bars 138, 178 and 180. The note was added – most probably on the basis of such a comparison – in GE, which was then repeated in EE2

Compare the passage in the sources »

category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources

issues: EE revisions, Errors in FE, GE revisions, Uncertain notes on ledger lines, Errors of GC

notation: Pitch

Missing markers on sources: FE1, FE2, FES, FED, FESch, FE3, FE4, GE1, GE2, EE1, EE2