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 sources includes a restoring e
2 at the end of the bar. It must be Chopin's oversight – it is the most frequent mistake committed by Chopin. In this case, the likelihood of an error was additionally increased by the change of pitch of the note – initially, Chopin wrote here a
2 in A – performed almost certainly due to the combination with the next bar.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Interpretations within context; Differences between sources
issues: Omissions to cancel alteration, Errors resulting from corrections, Errors repeated in GE, Errors repeated in FE, Errors repeated in EE
notation: Pitch