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=""
The marks in CJ and CK look like long accents, although the one in CJ is written a quaver later. Having compared it with similar b. 22, we consider the mark of CK to be more accurate. The versions of CB and EL cannot be authentic; however, the diminuendo hairpin in EL is one of the possible interpretations of the manuscripts.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Graphic ambiguousness; Differences between sources; Corrections & alterations
issues: Long accents, Inaccuracies in JC, Balakirev's revisions
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins