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=""
Both the ending of the slur in bar 450 and the beginning of a new one in bar 452 fall on musically unjustified places. That gives rise to the suspicion that the notation could be inaccurate or even erroneous. A possible cause of that inaccuracy is indicated by the correlation between the slurs and the octave sign – the first slur ends where the octave sign begins in the sources, while the second slur begins just when the octave sign ends. A similar situation occurs in the autograph of the Etude in E major, op. 10 no. 11, bars 40-42; therefore, it may be the composer himself that is responsible for the inaccurate slurs. In the main text, we extend the slurs so that they encompass all semiquavers; moreover, in bar 452, we suggest beginning a new slur due to the beginning of a four-bar section.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: Inaccuracies in FE, Inaccurate slurs in A, Errors in GE
notation: Slurs