Best way to notate 3+3+2 syncopated rhythm

Question

I'm arranging a piece in 4/4 with a syncopated 3+3+2 Latin rhythm throughout, and am wondering which (if either) would be the better way to notate. Here's the first notation, which emphasizes these 3+3+2 groupings in both the left and right hand.

Here's a recording I made of the arrangement if hearing it would help:

Youtube - Aquatic Ruin Zone Piano Solo

Here's the second notation, which uses traditional rhythmic notation. I'm thinking that since this piece emphasizes this 3+3+2 rhythm, the top would be the better option, but I'd like some help. Thank you!

Answer 1

I would stray away from your first notation, as you've sensed. Trained musicians won't find it too confusing, but it's uncommon enough that it may occasionally trip someone up. (I admit that your last measure in the right hand, with the dotted-quarter rest, looks really strange to me even though I know exactly what it's saying. It's just not something we're used to seeing.)

I would thus recommend your second (the "traditional") solution, where you clearly show beat 3 of each measure. But perhaps you could augment it with some further information in the score; one solution could be to suggest the 3+3+2 grouping at the start of the piece:

If that's a little much, a helpful description alongside the tempo could also work:

Answer 2

Based on my experience reading and playing many Latin styles over the years, write it in 4/4. There really should be no special accommodation for 3-3-2 rhythms in this piece and in general, Latin music. This piece does not always use the 3-3-2 rhythmic grouping. Both hands play rhythms and patterns at times that are 100% 4/4. If you write it in 3-3-2, the times when you DON’T do 3-3-2 you are going to have some very unusual looking rhythms. On the other hand, in 4/4, musicians are very used to reading the syncopations one uses to imply a 3-3-2 feel.

Latin music has a lot of 8th note syncopations and in my experience Latin players mainly think of a sustained note on the 2+ as a push or syncopation into the 3rd beat as opposed to 123-123-12.

Answer 3

Neither of the first gives a 3+3+2 rhythm in the bass. I've looked a lot of Latin music from Cuban, Brazilian, Argentinian, etc. and all of them use the following: dotted quarter, eighth-tied-to-quarter, quarter. I tend to think of this rhythm as two dotted-quarters followed by a quarter, but I haven't seen it notated that way. The point as mentioned in other replies is to mark the halfway spot in the measure. Especially on a piano, the melody part may not agree rhythmically with any of the bass but the suggested notation will be easy to read. (The drums play other patterns that interlock with the 3+3+2 to give a more complex rhythm.

Answer 4

You could improve this to be in line with recommended standards for notation.

• First bar RH: the second version would be more usual, but the first works.
• Fourth bar: never write dotted rests except in compound time. There should be a quarter note rest and an eight note rest.
• First bar LH: the middle of the bar should always be visible, so your second version is better, except the E should be one quarter note. Same for bar 4 and for the D in bar 3.

Answer 5

I found this fragment

very difficult to interpret at first sight. It's hard to see how many parts there are (it kind of looks like three) and it therefore feels as though some rests are missing.

I think the second A-quaver should be tied to the D instead of to the previous three quavers. That way we can immediately see there are two parts and not three. It also maintains the 1-2-3 of the first beat.