Rhythmic Notation Question

[bako]

In one composition I wrote, a rhythm section vamp figure was grouped as 4/4 + 3/4 + 5/4 or 7/4 + 5/4.
The melody can be best understood if notated as 4 bars of 3/4.
Favoring the rhythm section obscures the melodic rhythmic grouping.
Favoring the melodic grouping obscures the rhythm section figure.
I am tempted to write the melody one way and the rhythm section the other but that would make communication difficult.
In this instance I favored the rhythm section but I feel the melody comes across at as harder than it is due to the notation.

A composition I was working on today is in a slow 3/4, even 8th's, eighth notes and sixteenths all the way, simple stuff until the turnaround figure.
At a 16th note subdivision I have the following groupings: 5/16 + 5/16 + 4/16 + 6/16 + 4/16 Together it adds up to 24 which is 16th notes over 2 bars of 3/4.
At the 6/16 moment the bass plays 4 against 6, 4 dotted 16th's against 6 16th notes.
To simplify somewhat I made the last 2 bars 6/4 to alleviate the cross the bar line reading.
I am tempted to write it with 5/16 + 5/16 + 4/16 + 6/16 + 4/16 but that obscures the fact that the meter hasn't changed.

For those that write: What are your strategies for presenting polyrhythmic moments most conducive for sight reading?
For those that read: What are your preferences in how you like to see these kind of rhythms notated?

[kenbennett]

First thing that comes to mind is...

Write it the way you would conduct it.

If I were reading the melody, I would want to see it in the context of what the rhythm section is doing.

[jzucker]

First thing that comes to mind is...

Write it the way you would conduct it.

If I were reading the melody, I would want to see it in the context of what the rhythm section is doing.

same here

[JakeAcci]

I'd prefer reading more syncopated rhythms with easier time signatures for sure.

[Reg]

I don't care about the single notes... just phrase and articulate how you want it to be played... For changes, if you want it to groove or lock, your time sig. should reflect what you want. Reg

[bako]

Thanks for the feedback.

In my new song the whole band moves with the sub groupings and not against the original time feel.
I realize now that it would be best to shape the meters to fit the phrase and come back to the original 3/4 feel when it is done.

Some additional tools:

Accent marks (an emphasis mark would be useful. Is there such a thing?)
Phrase lines (sometimes can be confused with legato articulation marks)
Beaming notes together in the logic of the phrase.
I sometimes will use a dotted and numbers line to reveal rhythmic sub groupings.

Anything I left out?
Suggestions for a source of well written charts that reflect the expansive contemporary rhythmic language?
How are Sher's All Jazz Book and the European Real Book in this regard.

I want to be able to show up at Reg's monthly jam session, hand out charts that can be read as easily as playing Solar with an intro and ending plus a few rhythm section hits.

[czardas]

If the time signature obscures the rhythmic note grouping, I would be inclined to leave it out. I generally group notes depending on how they are accented. If there is no clearly defined pattern, then I would indicate shifted accents in the score.

I'm not keen on using combinations like '4 dotted 16th's' in a row, unless you have a time signature that justifies such a grouping (ie 12/32). Instead I would use ties when the rhythm goes against the natural pulse. If I were to write the afore mentioned rhythm in 3/8, then I would use the following combination:

(DOTTED 16th) (32nd_TIED_16th) (16th_TIED_32nd) (DOTTED 16th)

This way there is no problem maintaining the 3/8 grouping indicated by the beams over the notes. While this is perhaps a question of personal taste, the method more clearly shows the cross rhythm of 4 over 3 and should therefore be easier for musicians to interpret. As a point of interest - in this instance there is also another option, and that is to use a quadruplet instead.

Accent marks (an emphasis mark would be useful. Is there such a thing?)

Yes, use the greater than sign above (and occasionally below) an accented note:
>

Beaming notes together in the logic of the phrase.

No, that's why we use phrase marks. => Beam notes together in the logic of the rhythm.

[bako]

When I write, it is important to document an idea in any way I can.
Later I can go back and try and make it as socially understandable as I can.
The phrase reads ok in the original 3/4 meter for one measure + 1/2 beat.
The musician might not percieve the subdivisions but they will hear them after they play it.
It is the quadruplet that begins on the and of 1 of the 2nd bar of 3/4 that is the trouble maker.
For that reason I feel that reorganizing the time signatures in this instance is a better solution.
I need this figure to begin on a downbeat.

I also like using ties in the manner you demonstrated to help draw a visual connection to whatever else is going on.
Starting on a downbeat, quadruplets would also work.

[JakeAcci]

bako, unrelated to the issue of helping you with the notation, I'm very interested to hear any samples of this music...do you have anything recorded online anywhere that you'd be willing to share?

[czardas]

It is the quadruplet that begins on the and of 1 of the 2nd bar of 3/4 that is the trouble maker.
For that reason I feel that reorganizing the time signatures in this instance is a better solution.

I see the difficulty. There is nothing stopping you using an additative time signature for one or two bars. It doesn't alter the overall number of bars, so there should be no issue with communication. You can have different time signatures in different parts. I would also consider using dashed bar lines to separate rhythmic subgroups within the bar. So your last bar of 3/4 would be altered to (2+6+4)/16 and you would write a quadruplet in the second subdivision.

Time signature - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you chose to write it strictly in 3/4, then it would look horrible:

16th 16th (dotted 16th) (32nd_tied_16th) (16th_tied_32nd) (dotted 16th) 16th 16th 16th 16th

[bako]

Nice article. I run into additive time signatures playing some South American folk musics 6/8 (3/4) or 3/4 (6/8).
The way the notes are beamed indicates if a phrase is in duple or triple meter.
So far I haven't tried to use such a signature for just one or 2 bars.
I have at times used a dotted bracket line above or below to highlight the internal rhythmic stirrings to the same effect as the dotted bar lines.

It is a good direction to check out the notational methods of 20th century Classical composers as well as the musics of cultures with rhythms that require less common solutions to get it down on paper. There are charts of jazz composers that I would like to see but they haven't hired me yet.

[czardas]

Nice article. I run into additive time signatures playing some South American folk musics 6/8 (3/4) or 3/4 (6/8).
The way the notes are beamed indicates if a phrase is in duple or triple meter.

In the same article you will also find something about mixed meters. Don't confuse additive and mixed time signatures. The 6/8 (3/4) you are refering to is a mixed time signature. If you were to represent a bar of 6/8 followed by a bar of 3/4 with just one bar, it could be written as an additive time signature like this: (3+3+2+2+2)/8. However this is never seen because using 6/8 (3/4) is simply better. This is because it combines two already well understood rhythmic groupings.

[Reg]

Hey Bako... yes the Shur and Euro. as well as the All-Jazz fake books are much better... in all respects. The Latin books have cool rhythmic notation... easy for sight reading. There's a difference between getting something read at gig as compared learning or coming up with the cutest notational breakdown... which you appear to be very aware of. That being said ... it can be very difficult to make a multi or polymeter with syncopated accents fit into typical isometric patterns. Sound like fun... When you finish... post it and I'll gladly try and sightread... feed back thing...Reg

[bako]

What I am referring is an either/or situation. 3/4 (6/8) Phrases occur in either triple or duple meter or both at the same time.
The beam organization reflect the difference. There are always 6 eighth notes to a measure.
Would that be considered mixed or additive meter?

[bako]

Sounds great Reg. I'll have to get to a scanner. The computer with my notation program died and that version no longer works on my present machine. A situation I will have to remedy sometime soon. I'm not sure my penmanship is an aid to sight reading either.

[czardas]

What I am referring is an either/or situation. 3/4 (6/8) Phrases occur in either triple or duple meter or both at the same time.
The beam organization reflect the difference. There are always 6 eighth notes to a measure.
Would that be considered mixed or additive meter?

I consider it to be mixed. The difference (as I see it) is that with a mixed meter the rhythm contains two or more different note groupings (generally) within separate bars (which may or may not be equal in length). On the other hand, an additive meter specifies an unusual note grouping repeated in every bar, until you change the time sig.