In recent years, Beethoven’s metronome marks for his Ninth Symphony have experienced a renewed relevance, with several ensembles incorporating the indicated speeds in their performances. Nevertheless, previous research has shown that some of the marks have been incorrectly transmitted, and there is the suspicion that further mistakes are still undiscovered. Focusing particularly on the second and fourth movements, this article discusses the historical sources and scholarly contexts for these markings, within a historical framework that draws on Beethoven’s general tempo principles, as well as observations from contemporaries. The article suggests that the trio of the second movement has three speeds that can be justified historically, although the most popular option, minim = 160, arguably has the least supporting evidence. The discussion also draws attention to another metronome mark for the final section of the symphony that has been often overlooked. Finally, it argues that one of the most often cited examples of an erroneously transmitted metronome mark, the dotted minim = 96 for the Schreckensfanfare found in the later sources, is consistent with Beethoven’s wider practice, and should provide an incentive for performers to experiment with historically informed tempi in this familiar repertory.

中文翻译：

---

贝多芬第九交响曲的节拍器标记在上下文中

近年来，贝多芬第九交响曲的节拍器标记经历了新的相关性，一些合奏团在他们的表演中加入了指定的速度。然而，先前的研究表明，一些标记被错误地传输了，并且怀疑还有更多的错误仍未被发现。本文特别关注第二和第四乐章，在借鉴贝多芬的一般节奏原则以及同时代人的观察的历史框架内，讨论了这些标记的历史来源和学术背景。这篇文章表明，第二乐章的三重奏具有历史上可以证明的三种速度，尽管最流行的选项 minim = 160 可以说支持的证据最少。讨论还提请注意交响乐最后部分的另一个节拍器标记，该标记经常被忽视。最后，它认为最常被引用的错误传输节拍器标记的例子之一，即在后来的资料中发现的 Schreckensfanfare 的虚线最小值 = 96，与贝多芬更广泛的做法是一致的，并且应该激励表演者尝试使用在这个熟悉的剧目中具有历史意义的 tempi。