Some remarkable engraving

[John Ruggero]

I think that the following examples from the first edition of the second movement of Beethoven's piano sonata op. 10 no 2 show remarkable sensitivity on the part of the engraver, which is possibly influenced by the lost autograph.

In the first example we are directed visually to a specific interpretation: the gradual compression of the measures above the arrow indicates an accelerando that takes us at X to a long and powerful hold. The held notes are even centered in the measure like a bulls eye, the space before it suggesting a luftpause:

Bethoven op 10 no 2.2A.png (1.41 MiB) Viewed 566 times

In the second example, which is a varied, more animated return of the opening section, the passage begins similarly... but in the measure before the held chord, Beethoven writes out the left hand pattern, which expands the measure as if affected by a ritardando (shown by the backwards arrow), and this is even enhanced by the engraver with additional space. The held chord is now engraved with normal spacing, possibly indicating a lesser hold that allows the music to continue on with more momentum, and more in line with the doubled note values.

Bethoven op 10 no 2.2B.png (1.4 MiB) Viewed 566 times

Here was some engraving that may have actually pleased Beethoven, but for the loss of a natural for the E nachschlag at Z in the first example!

[benwiggy]

I do love these insights, John. Thank you for posting them.

[John Ruggero]

You are very welcome, Ben! And thank you for your encouragement.

[NeeraWM]

Very insightful indeed, John!

Playing my favourite devil's advocate game again: in the first example, let's imagine the engraver didn't expand the space before the fermata.
Where would have he placed the SF in your opinion?
Just an hypothesis that the spacing may have actually been reserved for the SF (which doesn't make your musical assumption about a break/pause/breath at all wrong!)

[John Ruggero]

Thanks, Neera. It's always important to consider other possibilities.

In this case, however the sf doesn't appear to me to be a problem. The engraver could have placed it just as he did the previous ones and the one on the fermata chord in the second example. At X he had some extra room to put the sf and he took advantage of it; probably too much so.

But that got me thinking about the fermata itself. Yet that also doesn't really present a problem either in terms of spacing above. It could easily have been placed back a bit. And if this had been a consideration, why didn't he give the previous measure more space so he could squeeze in that missing natural before the E in the nachschlag?

And then there is the matter of the interesting spacing of the measures before Y.

One could always assume incompetence on the part of the engraver. Except that when one looks through the rest of the sonata and the other two of op. 10, there is nothing else like this. The spacing is as normal and regular as one could wish. The engraver was clearly more than competant and quite consistent.

https://vmirror.imslp.org/files/imglnks ... -Op.10.pdf

To me it smacks more of Beethoven unconsciously spacing these measures to match the way he played them, and the engraver slavishly imitating what he saw in the lost manuscript.