An Extreme "Measure"

[John Ruggero]

I think that Beethoven's distaste for changing stem direction in the middle of a pattern reaches a zenith in this example from the first movement of the "Waldstein" Sonata:

Beethoven op 53.1 centered beam.png (850.21 KiB) Viewed 639 times

An interpretation: He can't make the chord at A down stem because it is the last note in an entirely up-stemmed phrase. He can't make the following two notes of the triplet up stem because that would conflict with the following down stem notes. And he has decided not to make the following triplet lead-in up stem, perhaps because it would initially look too "high" for a run that is moving gradually from medium treble register into a high one. This forces him to take an extreme measure, a centered beam within the interval of a second.

[edwardsjethro]

So that's it, but even now I still find it strange.

[John Ruggero]

It's strange all right and impossible to engrave. But taking note of it can be helpful regarding interpretation.

In this case, it is difficult to maintain a consistent flow and good tonal control from the chord at A to the following note at B because of fingering issues. Maybe we should make a break and start a new phrase after the chord? Beethoven's notation and the reaction of the engraver of the first edition tells us no.The first edition did not break the beam (as they often did for hard-to engrave centered beams) because it would be unmusical to start a phrase on the passing note D. So the player must also resort to extreme measures to insure that the D sounds like a passing note from the C and not a new start. Fortunately, the triplet connector is non legato which makes things a little easier than if it had been legato.

[NeeraWM]

How much do you think may vertical spacing have influenced in all this?
The second beat of the second system can't go up *also* because it would collide with the slur, in addition to all you already said.

[John Ruggero]

Crowding did occasionally play a role in his stem direction decisions in the manuscripts, and one has to watch for that. Spatial considerations are much more apparent in the first editions, however. The engravers seem to be trying to get as much on the page as possible. (While still providing better page turns than one often encounters these days.)

However, in this case, I don't think it played any role in his decision. There is actually plenty of space up there. And running into slurs doesn't seem to bother him in the next measure.

I find it interesting that Beethoven was rarely constrained by horizontal space. His manuscripts are the most spacious that I've encountered. He was actually quite concerned (in his own way) about clarity for the engraver and left plenty of room for his own corrections. Later, illness made his manuscripts much more difficult to deal with and gave rise to this myth that his manuscripts are always a mess. Generally they are clear and easy to read.

[John Ruggero]

Here are examples of Beethoven's later musical handwriting at its best and worst:

op 79.2.png (1.23 MiB) Viewed 524 times

Op 101.4.png (1.15 MiB) Viewed 524 times

In the second example, he takes the time to spell out every note for the engraver at the bottom of the page because of the novelty of the low E, a new addition to the piano, and his awareness of the lack of clarity in the text above.

[NeeraWM]

Still... amazingly clear!
I wish more modern composers had this kind of clarity (and no, composing AT the computer is something else! )

[John Ruggero]

Here's another one from around the same time as the first one. At its best, Beethoven's musical handwritings has a kind of freedom, lightness, clarity and logic about it that reminds one of his music:

Beethoven op 78.png (2.33 MiB) Viewed 448 times