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=""
Chopin could have entered into [A] after Fontana had finished [FC]. In this case it seems slightly more likely than a possible oversight of the mark by the copyist or the engraver of FE, since a similar situation concerns also
and
in b. 267-268 (however, such serial oversights would happen both to Fontana and the engravers – cf., e.g. the ending of the Prelude in B
minor, Op. 28 No. 16 or the Prelude in E
major, Op. 28 No. 19, b. 28-32). Anyways, there are no doubts as to the authenticity of this indication; as nothing indicates that Chopin would have wanted to forgo it, we give it in the main text.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
notation: Verbal indications