Rhythm question

I have a piece that is sort of in 9/4 for most, if not all, of the piece, except it's divided into a bar of 5/4 followed by a bar of 4/4. I'm not exactly sure how I should format this - should I do one long bar of 9/4, a bar of 9/4 with a dashed bar line between the 5/4 and 4/4 measure, just have a bar of 5/4 followed by a bar of 4/4, or what? Thanks!

Write out the alternating 5/4 and 4/4 measures. 9/4 is commonly only used for three groups of three quarters (like in 9/8).

Write out the alternating 5/4 and 4/4 measures. 9/4 is commonly only used for three groups of three quarters (like in 9/8).

I would do what tokke said, but when making parts you could take up alot of space by doing so.

Another way of doing this is simply stating. (4+5) or (5+4) in the tempo marking, that way the conductor will conduct the single measure as one measure of 4/4 and one measure of 5/4 or vice versa.

If it were 9/8 I would use the beaming to express the 2+3+2+2 (or 3+2+2+2, but thats more of a 3+6, than a 5+4)

I have a preference for long measures, and have no problem with 9/4, but I know tokke has :) If you want to express where the natural accents lie, then it's the most clear with 5/4 +4/4 (I would prefer dashed barlines, since you experience this as one measure)

Most composers would go ahead and instead of writing it as "9/4" would write it as "5/4+4/4" with the dashed bar-lines down between the two.

BTW.

While we're talking shop, I'd also like to point out that this is a meter and notation question, not a rhythm question. :)

So long as the implied meter is clear through beaming and content, I don't think most players would have a problem with any of the suggested ideas: dropping it to 9/8, using an additive symbol in the time signature, writing it as alternating measures of 5 and 4, or leaving it as 9/4.

Write out the alternating 5/4 and 4/4 measures. 9/4 is commonly only used for three groups of three quarters (like in 9/8).

Strangely enough this isn't true. A 6/8 measure is clearly implied as divided by two groups of three. A 6/4 measure could be divided either way. This is the same with 9/8 vs 9/4.

Personally I would prefer 9/4 with dashed barlines

Strangely enough this isn't true. A 6/8 measure is clearly implied as divided by two groups of three. A 6/4 measure could be divided either way. This is the same with 9/8 vs 9/4.

Personally I would prefer 9/4 with dashed barlines

Is this rule true with all X/8 vs X/4 meters?

Unless they are sitting next to X/4 meters, I find X/16 and X/32 meters to be kind of pointless... IDK, sometimes diffrent denominators apparentley imply diffrent tempos, but thats what tempo markings are for... >.<

If possible, you could indicate the meter with the beaming or with ties. Off topic- I used to think hemiola was a disease.

We had a field day with that word for years when I started theory at uni.

Is this rule true with all X/8 vs X/4 meters?

Unless they are sitting next to X/4 meters, I find X/16 and X/32 meters to be kind of pointless... IDK, sometimes diffrent denominators apparentley imply diffrent tempos, but thats what tempo markings are for... >.<

readability is a big factor too. for example, a active measure of 65/64 would be easier to read than a measure of 65/4 at any tempo.