Submission Information:
Series: Super Mario
Game: Super Mario Galaxy
Console: Wii
Title: Super Mario Galaxy
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: XiaoMigros (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=6725)
[attachment deleted by admin]
Notes:
- Official title is "Super Mario Galaxy"
- I wasn't sure whether to submit this as a replacement to the current on-site version (in need of a rehaul) since solo piano sheets are preferred, so if anyone thinks the two pianos sheet should be kept up that's fine with me too.
- Left out a lot of stuff to create larger contrasts, I can add certain stuff back in if it's better suited
- Looking for a nice text word for m72
Sorry in advance for the time this will need, but on my end I have enough to update this fairly regularly
Quote from: XiaoMigros on June 20, 2022, 04:09:25 AMI wasn't sure whether to submit this as a replacement to the current on-site version (in need of a rehaul) since solo piano sheets are preferred, so if anyone thinks the two pianos sheet should be kept up that's fine with me too.
Typically, duets will be replaced with duets so that we continue to offer the same arrangement type. It might be unlikely anyone out there is using the duet as-is, but there is definitely enough material in the original track to fill out a solid duet arrangement. So I'd recommend submitting this separately as a solo (and sometime down the line you or I or someone else can make a duet version? I've wanted to for a while but just haven't gotten around to it :P)
I'd be down for making one together :) In the meantime I'll make this a not-replacement then.
Whoa, someone finally did it—submitted a solo piano version of the end credits music.
This is a historic day in NinSheetMusic history! Thank you, Xiao.
Quote from: LeviR.star on June 20, 2022, 08:27:19 AMWhoa, someone finally did it—submitted a solo piano version of the end credits music.
This is a historic day in NinSheetMusic history! Thank you, Xiao.
Yes! Super happy to see this. A classic piece :D
Quote from: XiaoMigros on June 20, 2022, 07:50:20 AMI'd be down for making one together :) In the meantime I'll make this a not-replacement then.
Alrighty let's do ittt (I'll message you separately haha)
Sounds good :P
Very nice work on this! I mostly have playability and arranging suggestions to give, aside from a few notes.
-m1 and pick up: You could also write the first chord like this:
Spoiler
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/863709312067829811/999681148651311204/unknown.png
This is kinda what I hear in the original (a bit lower Eb bass and a higher chord). Either way, for the R.H. I'd recommend removing the lower Eb, since it's pretty hard to play that Eb with the 3-note run before it.
-m7: The L.H. has a different rhythm here (dotted quarter - 8th tied to quarter - quarter)
-m8: Kinda same playability thing as m1, I'd either remove the lower Eb of the R.H. so the thumb can take the F, or remove the F on beat 1.25 so the R.H. has time to jump to the Eb following that.
-m10-11: This R.H. also seems very difficult to pull of neatly at speed, maybe you could keep it at just adding the G for the first note of the 4-note run? (it's still hard but more managable)
-m22: I hear an Eb-Bb dyad at beat 4.75 (instead of Ab-C)
-m26-27: The second layer in the R.H. isn't playable without the pedal, but I'm guessing the pedal isn't preferable here (technically there is some magic to be done with the middle pedal, but it's better not to assume most players have this). You could have the first 3 second layer notes in m26 in the L.H. and have it jump to the low bass note afterwards, and stop the R.H. earlier in m27 so it can take the ones in that measure.
-m34: I hear an F-An dyad in beat 2.5 in the L.H., though you could change it to F instead to keep it as a single note.
-m36: I hear an Eb on beat 4.75 in the R.H.
-m41: Maybe it makes sense to flip the layers in here in the R.H., since the main voice (at least I think the clarinet is the main voice) goes below the second voice here.
-m42-43: Maybe you could use octave tremolos in the L.H. (or just in m43) as a build up?
-m43: I think I hear an En on beat 3 in the R.H. (instead of a D)
-m52: The chord on beat 1 is still in the same energy as the bars before, so maybe you could place the mf at the triplet afterwards, and write the L.H. as you did in the previous bars? (maybe as well as the last C in beat 4 of m51). Also, the triplet afterwards is actually just two 16ths :p
-m75, 77 and 78: Maybe you could add staccatos(+tenutos) to the quarter notes in the R.H. in these measures?
-m100: R.H. F on beat 3 should be Ab
-m101: R.H. G's on beat 1 and 4 should be Ab's
-m102: R.H. C at beat 2.5 should be a Bb
-m104-107: I don't really hear much of the added harmony here in the original I think, but it's good to rethink how to harmonize this melody here, since all diatonic chords don't necessarily work with their bass notes (like the Db/G at m105 beat 4, or all chords over the Fb in m107). I kinda doubt if all of m96-99 is parallel fifths too, but I couldn't really hear anything else.
-m118: I don't think I really like the glissando here for the orchestral run up to the Ab, as either the black key glissando will add Gb's and Db's that take away from the lydian sound of the ending, or a white key glissando will add lots of other notes that aren't in the key. There's also some lower stuff happening at beat 3 already, so I'd suggest something akin to this (for some reason the clefs are kinda buggy in this measure, so don't copy it exactly :p):
Spoiler
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/863709312067829811/999692603069038732/unknown.png
-m119-120: I hear the R.H. from m119 beat 2.5 an octave lower (which sounds a bit stronger imo too). Also, the last note in m120 is I think just a quarter note in the slower tempo (possible with fermata), not really a half note.
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m10-11: This R.H. also seems very difficult to pull of neatly at speed, maybe you could keep it at just adding the G for the first note of the 4-note run? (it's still hard but more managable)
Do you think dropping the lower Eb would render it playable enough? It would need a lot of time to be able to play it smoothly, but I think it's possible like this.
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m26-27: The second layer in the R.H. isn't playable without the pedal, but I'm guessing the pedal isn't preferable here (technically there is some magic to be done with the middle pedal, but it's better not to assume most players have this). You could have the first 3 second layer notes in m26 in the L.H. and have it jump to the low bass note afterwards, and stop the R.H. earlier in m27 so it can take the ones in that measure.
Here my intent was for the player to play the lower RH layer with the RH, meaning the upper layer cannot be sustained without the middle pedal. I prefer to write out sustained notes for their full duration like this when there's an abrupt jump in the middle, as it better shows the player what is happening in the original, and they can implement the sostenuto pedal, if they have one, as they see fit. I could change this section if you insist, but I would rather leave it as it is if that's okay.
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m34: I hear an F-An dyad in beat 2.5 in the L.H., though you could change it to F instead to keep it as a single note.
Did some experimenting and I like the single F most.
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m41: Maybe it makes sense to flip the layers in here in the R.H., since the main voice (at least I think the clarinet is the main voice) goes below the second voice here.
I kind of hear this section as a mishmash of voices, though the clarinet does have the lead-in to the next measure I visually prefer the stem directions facing away from each other. I don't think it's worth highlighting the importance of that voice here.
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m42-43: Maybe you could use octave tremolos in the L.H. (or just in m43) as a build up?
Did something of the sort, and I added a missing hit on b1 in m44 LH
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m52: The chord on beat 1 is still in the same energy as the bars before, so maybe you could place the mf at the triplet afterwards, and write the L.H. as you did in the previous bars? (maybe as well as the last C in beat 4 of m51). Also, the triplet afterwards is actually just two 16ths :p
The dynamic was me cleaning up my import badly, thanks for spotting that :) And getting rid of that triplet (that I mistakenly added because of a distraction in another voice) removes my playability concerns for that section, so thats cool
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m104-107: I don't really hear much of the added harmony here in the original I think, but it's good to rethink how to harmonize this melody here, since all diatonic chords don't necessarily work with their bass notes (like the Db/G at m105 beat 4, or all chords over the Fb in m107). I kinda doubt if all of m96-99 is parallel fifths too, but I couldn't really hear anything else.
For m80-107 I kinda added harmony as I pleased, as there wasnt much of it present in the original but I still wanted some sort of buildup. I'm open for suggestions on how to change this section.
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m118: I don't think I really like the glissando here for the orchestral run up to the Ab, as either the black key glissando will add Gb's and Db's that take away from the lydian sound of the ending, or a white key glissando will add lots of other notes that aren't in the key. There's also some lower stuff happening at beat 3 already, so I'd suggest something akin to this (for some reason the clefs are kinda buggy in this measure, so don't copy it exactly :p):
Spoiler
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/863709312067829811/999692603069038732/unknown.png
I like this, though I haven't gotten cross-staff notation to work in my finale yet so for now I've left it unedited as per the image you attached.
The rest of your feedback has been implemented, no further comment. Thanks for your time!
Quote from: XiaoMigros on August 09, 2022, 12:08:18 PMDo you think dropping the lower Eb would render it playable enough? It would need a lot of time to be able to play it smoothly, but I think it's possible like this.
Hmm yeah this works too, it does need some more practice but it's definitely more doable than with the low Eb.
Quote from: XiaoMigros on August 09, 2022, 12:08:18 PMHere my intent was for the player to play the lower RH layer with the RH, meaning the upper layer cannot be sustained without the middle pedal. I prefer to write out sustained notes for their full duration like this when there's an abrupt jump in the middle, as it better shows the player what is happening in the original, and they can implement the sostenuto pedal, if they have one, as they see fit. I could change this section if you insist, but I would rather leave it as it is if that's okay.
Hmm that does work as well. Maybe there's some way to make that clear in the sheet as well? Something like "opt. sostenuto", or shrinking the noteheads of the tied note, though both still have some ambiguity too.
Quote from: XiaoMigros on August 09, 2022, 12:08:18 PMI like this, though I haven't gotten cross-staff notation to work in my finale yet so for now I've left it unedited as per the image you attached.
For some reason your musx only wants to place clef changes at the start of measures instead of halfway, but maybe you can check if you can copy over from this file (https://www.dropbox.com/s/3y1ag4d1u2kdvqk/galaxyrun.musx?dl=0)?
Quote from: XiaoMigros on August 09, 2022, 12:08:18 PMFor m80-107 I kinda added harmony as I pleased, as there wasnt much of it present in the original but I still wanted some sort of buildup. I'm open for suggestions on how to change this section.
It mostly comes down to choosing notes that fit more in the context of the chord, rather than just having parallel intervals. Also, you could consider toning down the added harmony on off-beats, so these don't become too overwhelming. Some suggestions (actually heard some more stuff in the original that I didn't notice before):
-m91: Fn on beat 4 should be Fb (missed this one from the original actually)
-m93: Bb in beat 1 should be Db, Db on beat 2.5 should be Eb
-m96: Dn on beat 3.5 would work better as an Eb. Also, maybe you could just leave out the Fn on beat 4.75, as it makes the jump a little bit easier to play without white keys.
-m103: There's a different bass here, going from Db to Eb. You can probably figure out the details yourself :p The Ab chord in the R.H. on beat 1 should be a Db chord then.
-m104 and 106: These would be bars where I would consider leaving one voices out on the chord in beat 3.5, as well as maybe leaving beat 4.75 as octaves like in m96
-m105: Maybe similarly in beats 4-4.5, leaving out one middle voice (so pretty much copying over what happened in m97)
-m107: I'd change the Cn's and Fn's to Cb's and Fb's here to fit the chord (Fb major, or Fbmaj7 if you'd like)
Also, you missed this one:
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m36: I hear an Eb on beat 4.75 in the R.H.
Quote from: Bloop on August 10, 2022, 01:47:17 AMHmm that does work as well. Maybe there's some way to make that clear in the sheet as well? Something like "opt. sostenuto", or shrinking the noteheads of the tied note, though both still have some ambiguity too.
You're right, there is some ambiguity to it, but I've seen a fair amount of other people do this (like Debussy for example). I've added a sostenuto text marking just to be on the safer side.
Quote from: Bloop on August 10, 2022, 01:47:17 AMFor some reason your musx only wants to place clef changes at the start of measures instead of halfway, but maybe you can check if you can copy over from this file (https://www.dropbox.com/s/3y1ag4d1u2kdvqk/galaxyrun.musx?dl=0)?
That worked for the cross-staffing, but the clefs still haven't worked. I'll try copying everything across to another file later (though the sheet was made in the NSM template file so that's weird)
Quote from: Bloop on August 10, 2022, 01:47:17 AMIt mostly comes down to choosing notes that fit more in the context of the chord, rather than just having parallel intervals. Also, you could consider toning down the added harmony on off-beats, so these don't become too overwhelming. Some suggestions (actually heard some more stuff in the original that I didn't notice before):
-m91: Fn on beat 4 should be Fb (missed this one from the original actually)
-m93: Bb in beat 1 should be Db, Db on beat 2.5 should be Eb
-m96: Dn on beat 3.5 would work better as an Eb. Also, maybe you could just leave out the Fn on beat 4.75, as it makes the jump a little bit easier to play without white keys.
-m103: There's a different bass here, going from Db to Eb. You can probably figure out the details yourself :p The Ab chord in the R.H. on beat 1 should be a Db chord then.
-m104 and 106: These would be bars where I would consider leaving one voices out on the chord in beat 3.5, as well as maybe leaving beat 4.75 as octaves like in m96
-m105: Maybe similarly in beats 4-4.5, leaving out one middle voice (so pretty much copying over what happened in m97)
-m107: I'd change the Cn's and Fn's to Cb's and Fb's here to fit the chord (Fb major, or Fbmaj7 if you'd like)
These all work really well, the section sounds much better now! in m104-107 I removed a few more notes for playability, and also to reserve the 4-note chords for the more powerful hits.
Quote from: Bloop on August 10, 2022, 01:47:17 AMAlso, you missed this one:
Got it now, I also changed m37 a bit to make the change flow more nicely. Thanks!
Quote from: XiaoMigros on August 14, 2022, 06:32:38 AMThat worked for the cross-staffing, but the clefs still haven't worked. I'll try copying everything across to another file later (though the sheet was made in the NSM template file so that's weird)
Hm, very peculiar. If that still doesn't work, let me know, maybe I can work out something then.
Everything else looks good now though! I still have two tiny things, but I'll
approve for now ^^
-You could consider whether you want m97 and 105 beat 4-4.5 the same (so either parallel fifths or a G for harmony), or keeping them different.
-The end of the L.H. 8va in m118 should be extended a bit further, as the dyad on beat 2 isn't included atm.
Hello! I've wanted to review this earlier, but the past couple of months have been... especially wild. That said, I do have a bit of free time now to drop by and talk about some of the things that catch my eye as I look through and play test it. I apologize in advance if it seems like a bit much, but it's based on my love of this track and my honest feedback about how it can best be represented on solo piano - and how I feel we can make this arrangement the best it can be. Please don't take these comments harshly, because at the end of the day some of these are just my opinions. But the stuff that follows is my favorite thing about the arranging process :)
Anyway, without further ado~!
The first thing I want to clarify about this arrangement is its usage of pedal, or lack of. The way it is written right now with a general pack of sustained notes in the left hand, and staccatos in a lot of places, leaving it feeling rather empty in places. I feel like I personally have a heavier preference for using the sustain pedal than many others, but with a piece like this I would certainly want to use the pedal liberally to sustain the power of the bass notes and harmony.
Closely related to the above, the main thing I want to discuss about this arrangement is its overall texture and fullness. This is essentially the crown jewel of the soundtrack and is heavily orchestrated with a grandiose texture throughout. Some of the sections in this sheet focus narrowly on two or so parts without much regard for how they together can form the fullness of sound we've come to expect from the original track. The sections that really stand out right now in that regard are m. 28+, 56+. These two sections in particular I think would be much richer with arpeggios in the left hand instead of single bass notes.
With those in mind, let me know what you think before I go into suggestions for specific sections! (I'm ready to give them... :P)
And other miscellaneous stuff, a few things as I browse the arrangement without strictly note checking:
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m1 and pick up: You could also write the first chord like this:
Spoiler
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/863709312067829811/999681148651311204/unknown.png
The left hand wants notes too
Quote from: Bloop on July 21, 2022, 08:08:06 AM-m10-11: This R.H. also seems very difficult to pull of neatly at speed, maybe you could keep it at just adding the G for the first note of the 4-note run? (it's still hard but more managable)
Quote from: Bloop on August 10, 2022, 01:47:17 AMHmm yeah this works too, it does need some more practice but it's definitely more doable than with the low Eb.
I would strongly recommend omitting the Ab's as well because maintaining the hand position required to hit these notes requires a somewhat awkward stretch of fingers 2-5 to hit the Ab-F dyads, which doesn't easily flow with the rest of the notes.
- You don't need accents on basically every note in places like the intro (m. 1-7) and 44-15. They start to become redundant with overuse. You can use a ff dynamic or textual performance direction instead.
- For m. 7 beat 1 I would strongly suggest emphasizing the Eb octave in the right hand because otherwise you lose the power of the 4-note chords that you've built up in the previous few measures. You can instead delay the introduction of the 16th note line until beat 1.5 or even 2 to really be able to emphasize the Eb chord more.
More to come another time ^^
Quote from: Latios212 on August 16, 2022, 08:26:44 PMHello! I've wanted to review this earlier, but the past couple of months have been... especially wild. That said, I do have a bit of free time now to drop by and talk about some of the things that catch my eye as I look through and play test it. I apologize in advance if it seems like a bit much, but it's based on my love of this track and my honest feedback about how it can best be represented on solo piano - and how I feel we can make this arrangement the best it can be. Please don't take these comments harshly, because at the end of the day some of these are just my opinions. But the stuff that follows is my favorite thing about the arranging process :)
Hi! Sorry for my somewhat delayed response, things have been busy on my end too (as it happens I'm writing this in a hospital). No need to apologise for anything, there's no rush to get this accepted and I would also much rather have this sheet reach its full potential, probably while learning a lot as well. With that said, I'm open to any suggestions. Lets do this!!
Quote from: Latios212 on August 16, 2022, 08:26:44 PMThe first thing I want to clarify about this arrangement is its usage of pedal, or lack of. The way it is written right now with a general lack of sustained notes in the left hand, and staccatos in a lot of places, leaving it feeling rather empty in places. I feel like I personally have a heavier preference for using the sustain pedal than many others, but with a piece like this I would certainly want to use the pedal liberally to sustain the power of the bass notes and harmony.
Closely related to the above, the main thing I want to discuss about this arrangement is its overall texture and fullness. This is essentially the crown jewel of the soundtrack and is heavily orchestrated with a grandiose texture throughout. Some of the sections in this sheet focus narrowly on two or so parts without much regard for how they together can form the fullness of sound we've come to expect from the original track. The sections that really stand out right now in that regard are m. 28+, 56+. These two sections in particular I think would be much richer with arpeggios in the left hand instead of single bass notes.
Yeah, I'm with you on all these points (and noticed it a little when first creating the sheet as well). I tend to prioritise writing out individual parts rather than combining several, partly because it's not what I'm used to doing (yet) and partly because of confidence issues. I would need some guidance on this but I'd love to improve here.
Quote from: Latios212 on August 16, 2022, 08:26:44 PMWith those in mind, let me know what you think before I go into suggestions for specific sections! (I'm ready to give them... :P)
Go for it!
Quote from: Latios212 on August 16, 2022, 08:26:44 PMI would strongly recommend omitting the Ab's as well because maintaining the hand position required to hit these notes requires a somewhat awkward stretch of fingers 2-5 to hit the Ab-F dyads, which doesn't easily flow with the rest of the notes.
The Abs do make that section much more tough, and at that speed it doesn't seem too realistic tbh. Fixed :)
Quote from: Latios212 on August 16, 2022, 08:26:44 PM- You don't need accents on basically every note in places like the intro (m. 1-7) and 44-51. They start to become redundant with overuse. You can use a ff dynamic or textual performance direction instead.
I've left it at f for now but might change to ff later.
Quote from: Latios212 on August 16, 2022, 08:26:44 PMMore to come another time ^^
I await
Well then, seeing as no one's given feedback here in a while and I'm finally feeling brave enough to attempt reviewing this piece, I shall leave some feedback myself. Here goes:
- m25 b2.5 RH I also hear an F (in the trumpet line)
- m28 section: This is probably the official piano version influencing me, but is there a reason you decided to leave out the plucked violins entirely? iirc with the official version they used the violin part as the left hand but left out the cello version entirely. I think the cello notes will definitely be beneficial to the arrangement, but trying to work in some of those violin harmonies in the left hand would likely help it feel less empty.
Additionally, I feel that some of the notes in the RH are held for a bit longer than they should be (some of the whole notes seem more like dotted eighths and I don't think the half notes should be tied to the eighth notes in the even measures, for example).
- m34 b2.5 LH should be another An, not an F
- m36 I'm curious: Is there a reason you left out the upper Eb?
- m42/43 LH There's never any clear restrikes here and in the original it's tremolo'd all the way through, so I'm curious as to why you wrote it out this way.
- m50-52 LH The octaves you decided to make these chords seems to be inconsistent, so I was hoping you could explain why you chose the ones you did.
- m54 LH There's another Eb on b3 like in the preceding measures. It's quiet, but it's there. Additionally, in m45, the first Eb should be a half note and I don't hear the second one
- m56-63 I know Lat talked about including different voices and you mentioned not being super familiar with that. Idk the best way to help, but in the official version, they chose to include the plucked viola notes as the LH. I agree more with your choice here, tbh. However, I think the bowed string instruments should be added into the RH to make it a bit more full.
- m64 b4 LH I think I hear a grace note. No clue what it is nor if it should necessarily be added into the piece, but I figured I'd point it out.
I shall end my notes there with the exception of the fact that the ritardando in the final measure needs to be lowered. This is definitely a wonderful sheet and I hope to be able to play it one day! ;D
Thanks for the feedback, Whoppy! Sorry about the wait on this one, I've admittedly been putting it off...
Quote from: Whoppybones on December 22, 2022, 04:13:11 PM- m28 section: This is probably the official piano version influencing me, but is there a reason you decided to leave out the plucked violins entirely? iirc with the official version they used the violin part as the left hand but left out the cello version entirely. I think the cello notes will definitely be beneficial to the arrangement, but trying to work in some of those violin harmonies in the left hand would likely help it feel less empty.
I haven't seen or heard of an official arrangement, but I agree this section sounds emptier than it should without them. I added in a mix of both parts.
Quote from: Whoppybones on December 22, 2022, 04:13:11 PMAdditionally, I feel that some of the notes in the RH are held for a bit longer than they should be (some of the whole notes seem more like dotted eighths and I don't think the half notes should be tied to the eighth notes in the even measures, for example).
This was changed intentionally to provide a stronger contrast to the staccato LH, I feel like it conveys better on piano like this.
Quote from: Whoppybones on December 22, 2022, 04:13:11 PM- m34 b2.5 LH should be another An, not an F
Bloop and I talked about this already and settled on an F, but in the new context An does indeed fit better.
Quote from: Whoppybones on December 22, 2022, 04:13:11 PM- m42/43 LH There's never any clear restrikes here and in the original it's tremolo'd all the way through, so I'm curious as to why you wrote it out this way.
This was to incorporate the buildup in intensity by other means than just volume, and to transition more appropriately from the previous section
Quote from: Whoppybones on December 22, 2022, 04:13:11 PM- m64 b4 LH I think I hear a grace note. No clue what it is nor if it should necessarily be added into the piece, but I figured I'd point it out.
Not sure what you mean here
Everything else should be addressed! For m58+, I added the strings from the original but tried to preserve their contour rather than the specific notes.
I also made various other playability changes, as I wasn't happy (and am still on the fence) with this sheet's playability.
Files updated!
There's been a lot of feedback on this one, but it has been a while. No format comments, think it looks good there, but some note corrections and suggestions.
New link as well for the vid:
Spoiler
• m4 RH beat 4 I think it's a Cb on bottom not Ab
• m5 RH there's technically a held Bb through this measure - you could have it play on clarinet. Might add some color to that, or you could leave out. I know the Eb on beat 3 is an arranged note not present originally, could leave as is or keep as F because chord doesn't actually change here.
• m6 not sure I hear an Ab outside the bass notes for beat 1
• m62 RH lower layer beat 3 I think a C or A is more accurate - F major chord.
• LH m64-69-halfway-through: thoughts on potentially changing the notes here to 8th notes, as a way to carry the French horn rhythms with the notes of the low strings? I feel like currently the previous measures 56-63 LH part, the quarter notes led to a feeling of building towards something (that being the 8th notes played by the French horns), and to go to a slurred somewhat slow part feels a little like going from walking, getting ready to run, and ending up stuck in the mud. I suppose there could be two ways to feel this section from an arrangement standpoint so feel free to keep as is, just a thought.
• Outside that, m68 LH sounds like the tied note is an 8th note with two separate C 8th notes after it.
• m75 LH beat 4.75 sounds like Eb again
• m115 LH beat 4 sounds like same octave as beat 3
• m116 RH beat 4 I don't see why this is written different length from the LH?
• m117-18 8va part I don't hear the 16th's that are in the LH... I had a bit of an alternative idea to fill that space out though, and this way of writing the measure will get all the 8th-8th-quarter's in (I felt like my ears were missing the beat 3 one that was formally the half note and the 16th's). This might also make the 8 and 7 tuplet runs a bit easier (screenshot of alternate m117 and first half of m118):
(https://i.imgur.com/N8k9iEV.png)
Quote from: Kricketune54 on June 25, 2023, 03:59:33 PM• m62 RH lower layer beat 3 I think a C or A is more accurate - F major chord.
Not hearing this one, sorry
Quote from: Kricketune54 on June 25, 2023, 03:59:33 PM• LH m64-69-halfway-through: thoughts on potentially changing the notes here to 8th notes, as a way to carry the French horn rhythms with the notes of the low strings?
Quote from: Kricketune54 on June 25, 2023, 03:59:33 PM• Outside that, m68 LH sounds like the tied note is an 8th note with two separate C 8th notes after it.
Not hearing this either
Quote from: Kricketune54 on June 25, 2023, 03:59:33 PM• m75 LH beat 4.75 sounds like Eb again
Beats 4.5 and 4.75 are arranged notes, they are all actually Eb
Quote from: Kricketune54 on June 25, 2023, 03:59:33 PM• m115 LH beat 4 sounds like same octave as beat 3
This one was also an arrangement choice, the figure is otherwise somewhat lopsided (also beat 4 is more lush in the original than beat 3)
Quote from: Kricketune54 on June 25, 2023, 03:59:33 PM• m116 RH beat 4 I don't see why this is written different length from the LH?
typo
Quote from: Kricketune54 on June 25, 2023, 03:59:33 PM• m117-18 8va part I don't hear the 16th's that are in the LH... I had a bit of an alternative idea to fill that space out though, and this way of writing the measure will get all the 8th-8th-quarter's in (I felt like my ears were missing the beat 3 one that was formally the half note and the 16th's). This might also make the 8 and 7 tuplet runs a bit easier (screenshot of alternate m117 and first half of m118):
i like
everything not mentioned here should be adressed! Thanks for taking the time to look through this :D
Quote• m62 RH lower layer beat 3 I think a C or A is more accurate - F major chord.
Quote from: XiaoMigros on June 28, 2023, 11:59:09 AMNot hearing this one, sorry
relistened, I meant to say F minor chord, but what you have here is fine. I hear F and Ab on both beats 3 and 4 but I think your movement choice is easier and more identifiable.
Quote• LH m64-69-halfway-through: thoughts on potentially changing the notes here to 8th notes, as a way to carry the French horn rhythms with the notes of the low strings?
Were you not hearing or decided not to go with this suggestion?
QuoteNot hearing this either
relistened, hear as you have it
QuoteBeats 4.5 and 4.75 are arranged notes, they are all actually Eb
should've been more clear on my part - I thought the LH beat 4 (entire beat) was supposed to be the beat 4 timpani roll. That part sounds like that stays all Eb's to me. The Eb-D-C figure does sound interesting to have, kind of better than the original, but if we're talking just accuracy should be Eb's, but leaving up to you
Nothing else jumped out, but just wanted clarification the two bits for m64-69 and m68 before accepting
Quote from: Kricketune54 on July 05, 2023, 08:20:22 AMWere you not hearing or decided not to go with this suggestion?
I forgot to respond to that, oops
I considered it but I prefer a slow, grandiose feel here that draws its energy from elsewhere than number of notes, if that makes sense
Quote from: Kricketune54 on July 05, 2023, 08:20:22 AMThe Eb-D-C figure does sound interesting to have, kind of better than the original, but if we're talking just accuracy should be Eb's, but leaving up to you
Yeah, this part is just for arrangement and not accuracy purposes. Leaving as is also
Latios and I discussed a number of things in private, here's what we ended up changing:
- Changed the LH of beat 1 to be more empasised, by moving it down an octave, power chording, and tenuto'ing
- Added an extra note to b1 of the RH in m4, also for extra emphasis
did the same in the recurring places - Notes in m6-7 RH and similar places now span the gaps, no more rests
- m8 beat 1 RH: Eb is now also in octaves
- m12-27: Lowered the melody by an octave to pad out the texture
- m31-35: Lowered beat 1 of the LH for a nicer phrase contour
- m35: Gb is now F#
- m36-37: Rearranged the RH, and the melody is now on top
- m39-40: The 2 high RH chords have been re-transcribed
- the D at m40 beat 3 has been removed
- m63 has its beats realigned
- m119-120: The RH chords have 5ths added for extra oomf
Let me know what you think of the changes!
Quote from: XiaoMigros on July 11, 2023, 02:10:30 PMI forgot to respond to that, oops
I considered it but I prefer a slow, grandiose feel here that draws its energy from elsewhere than number of notes, if that makes sense
That's fine. I think this is a section you can take it two ways, and that's just the way I hear it being emphasized, but this works just as well.
Did a review of the additional private changes, got some additional clarifications on Discord. Everything looks good to me! Accepted.
This submission has been accepted by Kricketune54 (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=6528).
~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot