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=""
Leading the L.H. slur until the beginning of bar 164 is much less justified than in the case of the R.H. slur due to the over two-octave f1-E leap. Therefore, it is quite likely that it is the slur added in EE3 that corresponds to Chopin's intention – the engraver of FE could have been under the influence of the R.H. slur while interpreting the slur of [A], perhaps written with a flourish.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: EE revisions, Errors in EE
notation: Slurs