How can I represent this quarter note triplet based section in a time signature, so I can have it sync with a metronome?

Question

I have a song that starts with a time signature of 3/4 in 110 bpm. Then there's a quarter note triplet based section that goes like this:

123 123 123 123 123 1 | 123 123 123 123 123 1 | etc

where 123 is a full quarter note triplet.

This gives me something like 4/6?? which is not regular.

Could be represented like: 123 412 341 234 123 4 | ...

The only way I found to have this on a metronome is to do metric modulation and have a 4/4 in 165 bpm (1.333 * 110).

Is there another to represent this? What am I missing here?

EDIT: sorry if it's confusing, it's hard to explain...

Basically my bar should restart after 16 triplet notes, if you count it in quarter notes it's the 5 + 1/3

o.. o.. o.. o.. o.. o | ..o ..o ..o ..o ..o . | .o. .o. .o. .o. .o. . | o.. o.. o.. o.. o.. o

o = metronome quarter note . = triplet

Answer 1

After listening to the recording and reading the other answers I understand that you would like to notate something like this:

Now this might be hell to read, especially the last incomplete triplet. Also hell to notate. One solution is to write it with a tempo change, similarly to what Neal suggested. Perhaps it would be even more straight forward if you alter the meter in the first section, like this: In this case both sections are reasonably easy to read, and it's apparent how the lengths of the notes in the first section relate to those in the second one.

Answer 2

A modification to Neal's answer.
If you have a group of 16, I would really assume 16th notes in 4/4 come to mind, even before you mention triplets.
I think it is much easier to read an eighth triplet equals a sixteenth. It doesn't require any calculation.
You could sub-beam where the accents are to a single beam / partial single beam. But it's not always "liked". I like the sub-beaming, but maybe better without as a beaming of four is easy enough to read.

Answer 3

Today, I found out that the very common beat pattern that I mentioned in my answer has a name. (I knew it had to!) The section that is confusing you sounds like the Tresillo rhythm.

If you search this website for that phrase, you'll find a handful of posts that mention it. I recommend you look at these Q&A: What is this beat and why is it so popular; Different way of “grouping” eighth notes. They are describing almost down the T what you are playing in that section.

Original answer continues below:

---

How you intend to notate this depends on how you intend the groove to feel. I listened to your audio sample, and the best indication here is that your problem is merely with the metronome.

The rhythm of the first eight bars is on the left; the rhythm of the remaining bars is on the right. The difficulty you had in describing it notwithstanding, the pattern you are utilizing is extremely common in contemporary music. It's just about everywhere.

What sounds, to you, like 5 triplets with a partial triplet at the end (or however you wish to describe it) is almost certainly that figure on the right. The accents account for the "5 triplets" sound, and the final beat (of 4 sixteenth notes) of the bar accounts for the remaining "1/3" (that still is confusing to me). The reason it "lines up" after several measures is just basic math. I probably don't even have the math correct on the tempo, just be forewarned. I guessed. I do music, not math.

This gets back to the groove.

I found myself nodding along. I enjoyed the sample. I grooved. The metronome was just keeping time in the first 8 bars. Thereafter, it just killed the groove. Attempting to fit your groove to a strict timing structure of the metronome (in this case, calling it some Frankenstein's monster of 3/4) is asking for a headache---or, asking on Stack Exchange. For what it's worth, if you didn't have the metronome playing at the same time in that audio sample, and if the metronome weren't to be considered at all, the rhythm described above is what almost everybody here would conclude.

It is likely going to be much easier to figure out how to change time signatures in your DAW than to erect some convoluted solution to the timing of your music that requires it to be in 3/4 the entire time without changing the tempo.

Answer 4

So, 123 is one beat (one crotchet or 1/4 note), and I'm presuming the 1 at the end of the bar is a whole crotchet.

That makes each bar 6/4 - 6 crotchet beats per bar. 5 lots of triplets and one whole beat at the end will make 6 beats total.

The song starts in 3/4, tempo crotchet=110bpm.

Problem is does that original crotchet (=110bpm) continue to be the same tempo in 6/4? It appears that all you've done is make each bar twice as long as it was at the start.

By keeping the metronome at 110, instead of having 3 clicks per bar, you will have 6. It's hardly worth adjusting the metronome to click on each triplet note - it would be clicking at 330bpm, and wouldn't help much, if at all, possible.

So keep metronome at 110, and play the triplets so that 3 match to one metronome click.

Answer 5

So what you have is 16/8 but with a designated nonuniform "beat" pattern. I would recommend instead a compound meter, i.e. 15/8 // 1/8 . This makes your beat locations unambiguous, as well as simplifying the fact that the final note length is equal to your "triplet" lengths.

Alternatively, you could write triplets in a 5/4 // 1/8 meter and add the instruction above that the 1/8 measures have a beat length equal to 1/3 of the previous quarter note length, but I find that rather bizarre.