|
||
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
The missing 
hairpin is probably an oversight of the engraver of GE, although one cannot exclude the possibility that the mark was added in the last proofreading of FE.
Just like in the case of crescendo in bar 323, one can assume that the fact that both 
marks were placed under the L.H. part resulted from lack of space in [A], since in this case, the hairpin emphasises the topmost point of the sequence, which would be much more legible if it were placed next to the moving part of the figuration, hence between the top notes of the L.H. and the R.H. part. This is how the hairpin in bar 328 was interpreted in GE3. We suggest this solution, including both marks, as a variant.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: Errors in GE, GE revisions
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins