The absence of the flats restoring e flat2 and e flat may not be at first glance considered an obvious mistake - had Chopin wanted to use the notes e in the chord here, the notation of A would have been the simplest way to notate such a version. Still, there are arguments contradicting that possibility, such as comparison with the notation of the harmonically analogous bar 68:
-
on one hand the use of the notes e flat is obvious there due to the
placed in A before the last semiquaver of the L.H.; -
on the other hand, lack of before e flat2 shows how easily Chopin forgot to cancel the raising of that note, evidently considering the use of e flat there as obvious.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: Omissions to cancel alteration, GE revisions, Authentic corrections of GE
notation: Pitch
