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 long accent added by GE1 could be considered a revision or even Chopin's intervention were it not for the marking situated in the same place. The chord provided with this dynamic indication ends a long diminuendo (running from the beginning of this extended bar); therefore, emphasising it would be contrary to Chopin's clear idea, which was to attenuate the music. We assume a possible "symmetrical reflection" mistake – the accent that was supposed to be placed under the stem of the e
1 crotchet after the minim chord was printed over the stem of the F-c fifth preceding that chord. Taking into account the above, we do not give this accent in the main text.
Compare the passage in the sources »
category imprint: Differences between sources
issues: Long accents, Inaccuracies in FE, Errors in GE, GE revisions, EE inaccuracies, Authentic corrections of GE
notation: Articulation, Accents, Hairpins