Many times, I put ties in the middle of the bar:
These ties are noisy; I'd like to remove them. But I placed them there in the belief that they're required for my 4/4 time signature.
Ties are used to allow the beat to be clearly seen / to create a metric grouping which shows the note's relationship with the stressed beats of the meter.
Could it be that my time signature is wrong? The "stressed beats" of the song are not "four crotchets", but a 3+3+2/8 additive meter. Let's try this new time signature:
Is it reasonable to use a complex time signature like this (and to do so for the sake of eliminating ties)?
Is it correct that "if I use 4/4, I need ties to show where every crotchet begins" and "if I don't like those ties, I need a different time signature"?
One thing that makes this harder, is that frequently the treble employs a simple crotchet rhythm (against the complex meter in the bass):
If I changed to a 3+3+2/8 time signature, the crotchet rhythm would need to be spelled with tied quavers. Is there a better solution?
Can I escape that constraint by using a triplet ("play 3 crotchets in the time of one dotted minim")? Because a dotted minim fits nicely onto the stressed beats of the bass rhythm, and because the use of a triplet explains the ratio via which we can feel the bass rhythm?
A local time signature could work, but maybe this doesn't help the reader understand the relationship with the bass rhythm?
Mostly I'd like to understand engraving rules, and how to make this easier to perform.