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=""
There are no doubts that is in force already at the top of the passage. The placement of the marking in FE may be explained by its shape in [A] – it could have been so big that its right-hand end was already falling on the 2nd semiquaver triplet (cf. e.g. the ending of the Etude in C Minor, Op. 10 No. 12). Another possibility is a manner of writing indications within the range of their validity – cf. e.g. the end of the Etude in G
Major, Op. 10 No. 5. An appropriate shift was performed already in GE3.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources; Editorial revisions
issues: GE revisions, Centrally placed marks
notation: Pitch