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=""
None of the first editions reproduced the arpeggio before the chord with grace note correctly. The version of FE (→EE) is most probably a distorted notation of A1: the vertical curved line marking the arpeggio was reproduced as a conventional one, which converted it into a tie of the grace note. In GE the wavy line of the arpeggio encompasses the L.H. e note, which is a mistake. In all editions, the grace note is slashed, contrary to A1, which is probably an inaccuracy or a routine revision. However, it does not influence the performance, since Chopin would often use slashed and non-slashed small quavers interchangeably. In the main text we give the undoubtedly authentic notation of A1; in turn, we suggest the reconstruction of the notation of [A2] as an alternative version on the assumption that GE1 reproduced all elements of the notation, except for the wavy line's range, correctly.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: Inaccuracies in GE, FE revisions
notation: Ornaments