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=""
Our alternative suggestion is justified by a comparison with analogous bar 162. The eight-bar section starting in bar 152 is repeated from bar 160, with small changes. The differences in the pitch and rhythm are unquestionable; however, some of the differences between the performance markings just seem to present different aspects of the same performance:
- the accents given in bars 152-153 are almost certainly to be included also in bars 160-161. The same applies to the staccato dots at the beginning of bars 156-158 that most probably are also valid in bars 164-166;
- there is no reason to dynamically differentiate between bars 154 and 162, which are preceded by
in both phrases (2 bars earlier) and followed by
.
In spite of that, in the discussed bar we preserve the source version, since an inconclusive notation (without ) leaves the performer with more freedom in shaping the dynamics of this transitional bar.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Editorial revisions
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins