Changing time signature mid bar

Question

I have a puzzle about the notation of this score, specifically the bar divided by the dotted line in the second system:

My intention is that the first half of the bar should have the stresses of 6/8, and the second half the stresses of 3/4. However, I've been warned by a choral conductor that the "3/4" after the dotted line might lead singers to expect a full bar of 3/4. So what other options are there? Everything else I've considered would either get the stresses wrong or destroy the symmetry between the two halves of the tune.

---

EDITS

Here's a recording (from an audience member's phone, I'm afraid):

Linden Tree Carol v1

For comparison, here's an option that retains the 3/4 time signature and uses 3/4 beaming:

Answer 1

I would suggest keeping it in 3/4 throughout — even in your first 6/8 bar, the tenor is in 3/4. And your "split" bar is the same rhythm as the first full bar.

Adjust the beaming to make it look like 6/8: your later suggestion doesn't make that sufficiently clear in my opinion. And if it merited it, then you could use brackets over the score to group the syncopated bars into 6/8, as well — but you don't need the third one you've suggested because the motif is exactly like the pickup bar at the start.

A conductor will conduct those bars as 6/8 without a change in time signature in the score, because the piece does what it does. You can't sing or play those bars any other way.

A comment here mentions a dual "3/4 (6/8)" time signature. I wouldn't use brackets in the time signature: that's just noise. Nor do I interpret it as indicating strict alternation in each bar: it's an indication that both appear often enough to merit a mention at the start. Where two bars in eight for each verse are 6/8, that could warrant it; and it would mean that you wouldn't need to mess around in the score: the 6/8 bars could simply be 6/8. I do think that the brackets on those bars would help (as well as the beaming), and in that case I think I would keep the tenor in crotchets — as in my example here — to indicate the hemiola.

[It may be worth pointing out here that I sing, and have had to deal with all sorts of engraving styles. My view is that the score is there to help performers perform a piece the way the composer intended, but it should also assume a bit of musical common sense on the part of the choir/conductor. Put in as much as is necessary to get your point across. Leave out what can be left out because it clutters the score. This answer reflects that philosophy.]

Answer 2

I'd say the bigger priority is getting the stresses right, so try taking a page from the book of people composing syncopated music and put accents on the notes you want stressed - heck, perhaps even over all of the piece and not bother with time signature changes at all.

While some other composers of syncopated music have used irregular beaming groups before (e.g. one 4/4 measure of 3 8th notes beamed together + 2 8th notes + 3 8th notes), you want a split between a strong-weak-weak and a weak-strong-weak in the offending measure, so I don't think irregular beaming will fix your issue.

I think symmetry's going to be broken no matter what.

Answer 3

It looks, to me, like it's all written so it could be all in 6/8. The way the notes are written, in two lots of 3 quavers, says exactly that. There's no indication anywhere that says 3/4.

If you want some kind of guidance, look towards 'America', where the feel does actually move between 3/4 and 6/8, to get a gist of how it should be written to achieve what I think you're looking for.

Answer 4

Although its clear, after a little thought, what you want here I don't think that is the way to notate it.

That bar where you change time: where is the second beat?

And it would be a swine to conduct.

Why not have that as a 6/8 bar and indicate the stresses with accents? Conveys the same information and does not give the conductor, or the choir, any issues.

Answer 5

Having just listened to your recording, I am inclined to suggest using 6/8 throughout, because that's what the recording sounds like.

That is, I don't hear any syncopation on "laden," and while the chorus is very good and does take into account the text stress on the second eighth of the three-eighth-note pattern, there is nonetheless a metrical weight and lengthening of the first. If this is acceptable or desirable then perhaps you should put the whole thing in 6/8.

It reminds me a bit of "Infant Holy, Infant Lowly," which (in 3/4) has a pattern of two eighths followed by two quarters, with the eighths on the downbeat. The text stresses, however, always come on the second beat, with the result that the notation is arguably incorrect. (I have always assumed that the metrical alignment of the melody is correct for the original Polish words.)

---

Original answer:

I agree with your hesitation to use accents. Many conductors if not most will read them as asking for a sharp emphasis rather than as signifying a shift in the meter.

If I were you I would keep it in 3/4 and not do anything else unless you really want a sharp accent in the middle of the bar. Here's why:

1. The soprano won't put metrical stress on beat 4.2 because it's an eighth note on an unstressed syllable. They can't put it on 4.3 or 5.2 because they don't have notes there. You don't need additional markings to tell them that there's a musical stress on the first syllable of "laden" because the text underlay tells them.

2. The alto is syncopated in the second half of 4 and the first half of 5 no matter what meter you use. Also see point 5 below.

3. The tenor is in 3/4 throughout.

4. The bass has the same situation as the soprano in measure 4 and as the alto in measure 5, which brings us to the next point.

5. What does it mean for the first half of 5 to be in 6/8? How does one avoid a secondary stress on the third eighth note of the bar when there is a stress two eighths later and one at the beginning of the bar, two eighths earlier? I would call it impossible, but even if it isn't it's more trouble than it's worth. Better to accept that there's a secondary stress there, which will be minimal because there's no syllable but present nonetheless. If you recognize that secondary stress then the bar is in 3/4.

The previous bar could be in 6/8 or 3/4. It's probably going to sound to the audience like the melody is syncopated one way or the other. If that really bothers you, then keep it in 6/8 and you might be able to overcome it. But it will be much easier for the conductor and the singers if you keep it in 3/4 and let the textual meter interact with the musical meter to create the subtle syncopation that I suppose is your intention.

Answer 6

The solution I've settled on combines at least two of those suggested by others, which is why I'm answering my own question. Please let me know if anything is unclear in this version.

---

EDIT

As discussed in the comments below, an option that might be kinder to the tenors would retain the tied notes in the first 6/8 bar:

Answer 7

Yes, at first glance the 3/4 time signature might lead singers to expect a full bar. Just like it might if there was an anacrusis at the beginning of the piece. But the fact that there ISN'T a full bar will very soon be apparent. I wouldn't worry about that aspect of it.

The change from 3+3 grouping to 2+2+2 is actually pretty well shown in the beaming. But I don't mind the explicit key signatures. Quite like them, actually!

It won't be difficult to conduct. Particularly as choral conductors tend to mould phrases rather than 'beat time'. They'll do the same things with their hands whichever way the groupings are notated.