Submission Information:
Series: Pokémon
Game: Pokémon Stadium 2
Console: Nintendo 64
Title: Stadium
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Fernman (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=8072)
Moving this over from my personal arrangements thread.
I warmed up to Latios' suggestion in measures 5-8
I ask that the inversions in measures 1 through 4 stay as they are since that is what I hear in the treble staff which I brought down on octave,
I rearranged the beat 4 of m3 and 19 so it doesn't parallel the RH and instead sounds more march-y
Krititune suggested adding in more of the bass pattern in m9 - 15. I don't think that is possible since all my LH fingers are busy playing what's there.
Another countermelody begins in m17 that I excluded since I'm not sure how that is playable with everything currently being played. Krititune mentioned that page 2 sounds a bit empty. I agreed with that since the harp is playing in that section which goes all over the staff and I don't find that playable given what is currently written.
formatting-wise there is a ritardando on b2 of measure 7 which didn't transfer over from Musescore, and the 2 16th notes in m32 have the parenthesis around it in Musescore, but it didn't convert over, not to mention the placement of the dynamics is also off
I omitted some of the harmonics which make I find make it more difficult than necessary to play.
I'm open to improving the sheet, but if there are any breaking points do let me know.
Here's (https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/2prh2a2oy4xu0h6a715ld/PS2-Stadium.mus?rlkey=9zjrsswpxm1pw9kkbb99qp7bs&dl=0) a .mus with fixes of the things you mentioned that were off, as well as some other fixes:
-Removed the abbreviated .pno markings
-Updated the layout a bit (the staves where pretty close together)
-Added quotation marks on the title on the second page
-Put the New Bark Town part of the arranger credits in two lines so it doesn't creep up under the song title.
Here are a couple of first comments:
-Maybe instead of "Composition by:" you could do "Composed by", so it's consistent with the arranger credits?
-m1-6: I think you can add some of the harmony back in the R.H., without making it too hard to play: some examples would be m1 beat 1 and beat 4 (only the first note of beat 4), and m2 beat 1. These are places where the R.H. thumb has enough space and time to play a note.
-m3 and 19: There's some more stuff happening in the L.H. here:
Schermafbeelding 2024-01-20 162528.png
For easier playability, you could leave out the bottom note of any dyad.
-m9-12: I've been thinking about this section for a bit, but I'm still not sure what I'd do myself exactly haha. The thing I noticed is that some parts of the horn melody (currently in the L.H.) seem to be end up sounding secondary: some notes are missing in m11, the pickup at m8 beat 4 is missing too, and there seems to be some harmonic ambiguity in m10. Maybe instead of arranging the high strings in the R.H. and the horn melody in the L.H., you could arrange the horn in the R.H. and the lower strings (the accents) in the L.H.?
-m12: There's not Bb in the L.H. on beat 4, but there should be an An in the R.H. as pickup for the melody in m13.
-m24: The L.H. on beat 2.5 and 3 goes from Asus4 to A major, maybe you could write these chords as A-D-E going to A-C#-E?
-m28: The A on beat 4 in the R.H. should be an octave higher
-m25 and 27: You could write these dotted half notes as whole notes too, to fill up the bar. In m25 in the L.H., maybe using D instead of B will make the L.H. sound a bit more grounded.
-m26: Maybe you could use an A instead of an E for the snare drum hits, as that's the note that the low strings are playing?
-m28-32: I think you can add some bass notes here to fill up the empty space:
--m28: An A in a separate layer below the L.H.
--m29: a G an octave below the half note
--m30: an A a 5th below the L.H. in a separate layer as a half note
--m31: a G in a separate layer as a whole note
--m32: The bass note here should be A again, but you could also put the E of these chords in a separate layer as a whole note to fill up the bar
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AMHere's a .mus with fixes of the things you mentioned that were off, as well as some other fixes:
Thanks for the file, but it will only helpful up until there is something I can't do in notepad, which did happen, (the voicings at the end) So maybe all formatting can be left till the end. I went back to using my Musescore file.
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AM-Maybe instead of "Composition by:" you could do "Composed by", so it's consistent with the arranger credits?
I did the opposite and said "Arrangement for piano by", so it sounds more formal.
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AM-m1-6: I think you can add some of the harmony back in the R.H., without making it too hard to play: some examples would be m1 beat 1 and beat 4 (only the first note of beat 4), and m2 beat 1. These are places where the R.H. thumb has enough space and time to play a note.
I added it back into beat 1, and you got me thinking and actually pushing myself that I add more harmonics. It is playable/reachable for my handspan, it will just take some more practice to get it to tempo.
Edit: Thinking about this, while I was putting in some harmonics, the "issue" I found was that it sounds more harmonic/fuller at first, then it sounds empty and then back to fuller. So that is why I included more harmonics since it seemed "unbalanced" so to speak. I'm sure a pro can play it as written at tempo so maybe I'll just arrange it as such for purposes of NSM. Otherwise using the RH fingers 3-5 to on those 16th notes at tempo is quite a developed skill then jumping down at tempo requires practice to say the least.
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AM-m3 and 19: There's some more stuff happening in the L.H. here:
Yes I'm aware of the descending bass, but I don't see a way to play it with what I have written. However, if you prefer it be included how about on the repeat (m19) I change the measures to be that bass pattern, and the subsequent measure would be changed to the bass pattern Latios initially suggested as it fits well. I rather keep the first instance of this the climbing notes since it makes it sound like you are entering a stadium.
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AMFor easier playability, you could leave out the bottom note of any dyad.
True, but I learned to play it that way so I'm fine with how it's written.
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AM-m9-12: I've been thinking about this section for a bit, but I'm still not sure what I'd do myself exactly haha. The thing I noticed is that some parts of the horn melody (currently in the L.H.) seem to be end up sounding secondary: some notes are missing in m11, the pickup at m8 beat 4 is missing too, and there seems to be some harmonic ambiguity in m10. Maybe instead of arranging the high strings in the R.H. and the horn melody in the L.H., you could arrange the horn in the R.H. and the lower strings (the accents) in the L.H.?
I arranged it as you suggested. It sounds good, but I wouldn't personally emphasize the bass pattern string accents. I would rather have it be more melodic, but there are different ways of skinning the cat.
I omitted the An pickup on beat 4 in m8 since it overlaps with the climbing notes. This makes it more difficult to play and it will get lost anyway. or at least sound blurry with the rest of those notes.
In how it was arranged prior I'm not sure what you meant by harmonic ambiguity in this context and what that really presents (for lack of a better word) musically... unless you mean there is no clear chord present in the measure.
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AM-m12: There's not Bb in the L.H. on beat 4, but there should be an An in the R.H. as pickup for the melody in m13. -m24: The L.H. on beat 2.5 and 3 goes from Asus4 to A major, maybe you could write these chords as A-D-E going to A-C#-E? -m28: The A on beat 4 in the R.H. should be an octave higher -m25 and 27: You could write these dotted half notes as whole notes too, to fill up the bar. In m25 in the L.H., maybe using D instead of B will make the L.H. sound a bit more grounded.
These are fixed
I did however add another A in the base on beat 4 of m12 just so it doesn't sound empty with only the RH playing
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AM-m26: Maybe you could use an A instead of an E for the snare drum hits, as that's the note that the low strings are playing?
I hear what you are pointing out, but I like the E because the snare sounds different from the rest of the pitched instruments. The E gives it a different texture I guess.
Quote from: Bloop on January 20, 2024, 08:13:33 AM-m28-32: I think you can add some bass notes here to fill up the empty space: --m28: An A in a separate layer below the L.H. --m29: a G an octave below the half note --m30: an A a 5th below the L.H. in a separate layer as a half note --m31: a G in a separate layer as a whole note --m32: The bass note here should be A again, but you could also put the E of these chords in a separate layer as a whole note to fill up the bar
m29 I also hear a low d after the G on beat 2.5, so I brought that up an octave. Though I must say to play that low G I have to pick finger 5 part way through to get to the D.
Fixed
Oddly a stacatto on m21 beat 1 RH is appearing below the notes.... Let's fix that at the end of the second review.
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMThanks for the file, but it will only helpful up until there is something I can't do in notepad, which did happen, (the voicings at the end) So maybe all formatting can be left till the end. I went back to using my Musescore file.
I thought working in different layers was possible in notepad too, at least in two layers? Anyway yeah, probably best to leave the total formatting for the end ^^
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMI did the opposite and said "Arrangement for piano by", so it sounds more formal.
That works too! In that case, I think it looks a bit better to at least remove the colon in the composer box, or add it to both arranger sections too, again for consistency
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMI added it back into beat 1, and you got me thinking and actually pushing myself that I add more harmonics. It is playable/reachable for my handspan, it will just take some more practice to get it to tempo.
This was pretty much what I came up with as well, lookin good!
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMEdit: Thinking about this, while I was putting in some harmonics, the "issue" I found was that it sounds more harmonic/fuller at first, then it sounds empty and then back to fuller. So that is why I included more harmonics since it seemed "unbalanced" so to speak. I'm sure a pro can play it as written at tempo so maybe I'll just arrange it as such for purposes of NSM. Otherwise using the RH fingers 3-5 to on those 16th notes at tempo is quite a developed skill then jumping down at tempo requires practice to say the least.
It's not a bad thing if something requires a bit of practice ^^ We usually try to find a good balance between playability and accuracy, and the player always has the freedom of leaving out a note or two if they so desire. In this case, I personally don't have any problem playing the 16th notes for example, so I'm assuming that with most players will be able to get there with too. You can also even play it with the 2nd to 4th finger even, if that feels a bit easier.
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMYes I'm aware of the descending bass, but I don't see a way to play it with what I have written. However, if you prefer it be included how about on the repeat (m19) I change the measures to be that bass pattern, and the subsequent measure would be changed to the bass pattern Latios initially suggested as it fits well. I rather keep the first instance of this the climbing notes since it makes it sound like you are entering a stadium.
I actually wasn't referring to the bass pattern at all: you're able to see the screenshot I posted, right? The climbing strings play a bit more in beats 3.5-4.75, and your current beaming for beat 2.5-3 is incorrect. Arranging the bass the second time through is a nice touch though, I don't mind that! I do think I prefer it over the faster rising strings haha, but either or both is possible ^^
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMI arranged it as you suggested. It sounds good, but I wouldn't personally emphasize the bass pattern string accents. I would rather have it be more melodic, but there are different ways of skinning the cat.
I omitted the An pickup on beat 4 in m8 since it overlaps with the climbing notes. This makes it more difficult to play and it will get lost anyway. or at least sound blurry with the rest of those notes.
Yeah leaving out that An is alright, the harp run works similarly as a pickup to that B. You could even use cross-staffing to move the last B and C# in the m8 to the R.H., so it's easier for the L.H. to jump back down to the D-G and for the R.H. to get in there.
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMIn how it was arranged prior I'm not sure what you meant by harmonic ambiguity in this context and what that really presents (for lack of a better word) musically... unless you mean there is no clear chord present in the measure.
With harmonic ambiguity I meant that there wasn't a clear difference between m9 and 10 harmonically, mostly because the G major and D major chords weren't that clearly outlined in the higher strings and horn. With these chords and the melody above, that difference is a lot more clearer, so this looks good now!
In m12, I'm not sure how I feel about the B and F# in the L.H.: together with the A on beat 2 in the R.H., it sounds like this is a Bm7 chord, but it should be something more like an Asus chord (i guess technically A6sus2? or Gmaj7 over A? anyway anything that sounds like a V in D major). The F# also clashes a bit with the G in the R.H. on beat 1. The alternatives don't sound as amazing to me either, but it's best to at least add an A on beat 1, and put the B and F# (or only one of them) in a separate layer that resolves to the C# and E (or only one of them, again).
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMI hear what you are pointing out, but I like the E because the snare sounds different from the rest of the pitched instruments. The E gives it a different texture I guess.
My main thinking was that harmonically, the A major chord in this bar is missing the A, which makes it sound less like A major. Maybe you could put E's an octave higher and put the A as a dotted half note in a separate layer?
Quote from: Fernman on January 21, 2024, 03:10:08 PMm29 I also hear a low d after the G on beat 2.5, so I brought that up an octave. Though I must say to play that low G I have to pick finger 5 part way through to get to the D.
Ah yeah that's right, looks good!
Quote from: Bloop on January 24, 2024, 11:10:59 AMThat works too! In that case, I think it looks a bit better to at least remove the colon in the composer box, or add it to both arranger sections too, again for consistency
Fixed
Quote from: Bloop on January 24, 2024, 11:10:59 AMIt's not a bad thing if something requires a bit of practice ^^ We usually try to find a good balance between playability and accuracy, and the player always has the freedom of leaving out a note or two if they so desire. In this case, I personally don't have any problem playing the 16th notes for example, so I'm assuming that with most players will be able to get there with too. You can also even play it with the 2nd to 4th finger even, if that feels a bit easier.
Given my octave hand span I got a cramp/pain in the back of my hand when I first tried using fingers 2-4 on the 16ths. I guess I just need to work on my finger strength. I'm sure others can play it as you mentioned.
Quote from: Bloop on January 24, 2024, 11:10:59 AMI actually wasn't referring to the bass pattern at all: you're able to see the screenshot I posted, right? The climbing strings play a bit more in beats 3.5-4.75, and your current beaming for beat 2.5-3 is incorrect. Arranging the bass the second time through is a nice touch though, I don't mind that! I do think I prefer it over the faster rising strings haha, but either or both is possible ^^
Oh now I follow, I glanced at it, I prefer to have it simplified the way I had it for easier playability. but since the difficulty is increased already I'll add it.
Quote from: Bloop on January 24, 2024, 11:10:59 AMYeah leaving out that An is alright, the harp run works similarly as a pickup to that B. You could even use cross-staffing to move the last B and C# in the m8 to the R.H., so it's easier for the L.H. to jump back down to the D-G and for the R.H. to get in there.
Adjusted. I added a B at the bottom of the LH chord, even though the RH plays it.
Quote from: Bloop on January 24, 2024, 11:10:59 AMIn m12, I'm not sure how I feel about the B and F# in the L.H.: together with the A on beat 2 in the R.H., it sounds like this is a Bm7 chord, but it should be something more like an Asus chord (i guess technically A6sus2? or Gmaj7 over A? anyway anything that sounds like a V in D major). The F# also clashes a bit with the G in the R.H. on beat 1. The alternatives don't sound as amazing to me either, but it's best to at least add an A on beat 1, and put the B and F# (or only one of them) in a separate layer that resolves to the C# and E (or only one of them, again).
Theory wise I get what you are saying that before m13 starts a new phrase, m12 has to come to a close
Quote from: Bloop on January 24, 2024, 11:10:59 AMMy main thinking was that harmonically, the A major chord in this bar is missing the A, which makes it sound less like A major. Maybe you could put E's an octave higher and put the A as a dotted half note in a separate layer?
I added the A in another layer in LH. I rather keep the E where it is since it sounds ungrounded an octave higher.
Quote from: Fernman on January 25, 2024, 07:46:03 PMI added the A in another layer in LH. I rather keep the E where it is since it sounds ungrounded an octave higher.
It's at least better than no A, but I still feel like putting the E's an octave higher sounds better ;p I put my reasoning below, but if you really prefer the E's where they are right now, I'm alright with approving! There's of course still some formatting things left to do, but those are best taken care of at the end.
explanation on why not e below
Putting the E below still changes the quality of the chord: we usually hear the chord in relation to the lowest note, which is why in D major for example, a D major with a D in the bass sounds very different than a D major chord with an A in the bass. The former is used as a point of rest (tonic chord), but the latter is used in cadences moving towards a point of tension (subdominant), for example as D/A, A7, D. Another reason why I prefer the E's not being too low, is that the snare drum itself isn't a very low tuned percussion, it's more tuned towards the middle range.
Ah, seems I didn't notice that you updated your files! The layers in m26's L.H. could be switched around so that the E's have their stems pointing upwards, but I'll approve for now so another updater can take a look!
Yes, I updated the sheet per your suggestion shortly after your January reply.
Since you said the magic word "approve"
Quote from: Bloop on January 27, 2024, 09:47:55 AMI'm alright with approving!
I assumed it was moving to the next stage anyway so I didn't feel it necessary to post another reply that I made the change. Now I know to keep responding till I sill the blue approve.
I'll make sure it is fixed in the next update.
Coming back to this for a bit, recently in the updater discord we had a little back and forth about whether formatting should be fixed before accepting or before approving. We decided to do so before approving, as an approval essentually means that an updaters think the sheet is fully able to be uploaded to the site. At the accept stage it's best to work together on what things you're able to fix yourself in notepad, and what things an updater will need to fix.
Anyway, apparently the current .mus file has the contents of your star fox versus select sheet. Could you upload the correct .mus file? Then I can go ahead and fix the formatting things that were left ^^
Woops! sorry about that. the correct file is uploaded now.
FYI though, since I'm using the latest Musescore 4.2.x the XML cleaner is now giving me an error.
"XML error in file [file name] at line 66 Attribute "type" with value "grace-cue" must have a value from the list "cue grace large"
Everything still imports well, but the file name didn't carry over prompting me to make this file name mistake since I have to do it manually. I'll pay more attention though.
Updated the files with fixed formatting! Now I can definitely approve ^^
• Pickup measure I don't think there's a real rule on this but typically the dynamic aligns with the first notes, not necessarily the first beats (rests in this case)
• m1 and other places, RH when you have multiple layers, typically the preference is to align the staccato over the notehead and not over note stem. But it's a preference, I can't remember if you've been asked before, but I can make this change for you if you'd like (don't think you can in NotePad)
• m2 and m18 RH beat 1.0 might've said this before but staccato dotted 8th notes are not typically used, as they are a bit ambiguous as far as length goes. Usually, these are written as staccato 8th, followed by a 16th rest or an 8th note without a staccato and a 16th rest
• m4 and m20 RH beat 1.0 hearing this as same length as m2's beat 1, so whatever you want to do there you could for this measure too
• m8 LH 2.75 hearing Dn not En
• m13 RH 2.5 hearing this En tied to the En on 3.0
• m19 LH 1.0 sounds like a Bn, and 3.0 is Gn. Technically the low notes are only on 1.0 and 3.0 are half notes, but I think based off the line you're blending in, 4.0 should be an En as a result. I think you could also remove the staccatos here as well
• m24 LH 1.0 think the Dn could also go here like on 2.5.
• m25 RH the ottava could be adjusted a tiny bit. Typically the "8va" symbol lines up with the "8" a little ahead of the notehead, but the symbol is overall centered over the note. In it's current position, it looks like m24 4.0 should be underneath it as well.
Then, for the ending tail of the ottava, you could align that a bit closer to the last note it applies to as opposed to right up to where the ottava technically ends. Just a general formatting guidance, but please see the reference image for a visualization
• m27 RH in spots where two instruments play the same notes in the original, I sometimes like to reflect this by adding a lower octave. You could do this for beat 4, as well as at m31 beat 4 and m32 on beat 1 (dotted half note)
• m28 the cresc. could come down a little, and also doesn't have to extend all the way to the bar line. Maybe you could replaces the cresc. symbol with the cresc. text marking? it's kind of ambiguous as far as how long it's supposed to last. Is the forte in m32 intended to make the 2nd time through the arrangement after the repeat forte instead of mf?
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• Pickup measure I don't think there's a real rule on this but typically the dynamic aligns with the first notes, not necessarily the first beats (rests in this case)
now that I think about this, would it have been better that I made the pickup measure only a 1/8 instead of a 1/4. I can't make the change now in finale. That would have also avoided that placement of the mf.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m2 and m18 RH beat 1.0 might've said this before but staccato dotted 8th notes are not typically used, as they are a bit ambiguous as far as length goes. Usually, these are written as staccato 8th, followed by a 16th rest or an 8th note without a staccato and a 16th rest
I don't have a musical reason to disagree with this, however I like the fact that it makes the music cleaner by having less stuff on the page. a dotted 8th and 16th are very recognizable compared to having a space in between.
When I tried changing this in notepad in finale, that music value/space where the rest would go disappear or I would lose space for the beat itself by using the eraser... I would effectively have to restart the measure from scratch and keep all the beats intact. is this how finale works or is there something else I should be doing? This is nothing like Musescore.
Any way you could fix this with all the formatting?
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m4 and m20 RH beat 1.0 hearing this as same length as m2's beat 1, so whatever you want to do there you could for this measure too
I think this is the same as the above comment the dotted eight?
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m8 LH 2.75 hearing Dn not En
No, I hear the En
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m13 RH 2.5 hearing this En tied to the En on 3.0
No, I hear it rearticulated as it is written
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m19 LH 1.0 sounds like a Bn, and 3.0 is Gn. Technically the low notes are only on 1.0 and 3.0 are half notes, but I think based off the line you're blending in, 4.0 should be an En as a result. I think you could also remove the staccatos here as well
The LH Tuba line should be the same as the start of the song, but it is much clearer sounding at the start. I hear it as it is written and it sounds Staccato'd. This gives it a march-y feel. The notes being only detached doesn't have the same feel.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m24 LH 1.0 think the Dn could also go here like on 2.5.
Added
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m27 RH in spots where two instruments play the same notes in the original, I sometimes like to reflect this by adding a lower octave. You could do this for beat 4, as well as at m31 beat 4 and m32 on beat 1 (dotted half note)
I hear you, but in this case it brings the tone of the song down more than my liking.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m28 the cresc. could come down a little, and also doesn't have to extend all the way to the bar line. Maybe you could replaces the cresc. symbol with the cresc. text marking? it's kind of ambiguous as far as how long it's supposed to last. Is the forte in m32 intended to make the 2nd time through the arrangement after the repeat forte instead of mf?
I removed the forte since that was an old thought. I wanted the crescendo since it is natural to increase in dynamics climbing those notes and to the end of the song for a grand finish.
However, given the feedback from my Versus select arrangement that the crescendo has to go to the next level, in this case forte, then I'll pass. Not that I'm entirely opposed to it, but I rather remove the markings and leave it up to interpretation for NSM purposes. And the original I think is fairly even in dynamics in those measures.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AMThen, for the ending tail of the ottava, you could align that a bit closer to the last note it applies to as opposed to right up to where the ottava technically ends. Just a general formatting guidance, but please see the reference image for a visualization
I'm not sure if I can edit the 8va in notepad (if so let me know how), and this is interesting to know for the rest of my arranging. However since this is formatting could you handle this and the other stuff you pointed out please.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 06, 2024, 07:23:43 AM• m2 and m18 RH beat 1.0 might've said this before but staccato dotted 8th notes are not typically used, as they are a bit ambiguous as far as length goes. Usually, these are written as staccato 8th, followed by a 16th rest or an 8th note without a staccato and a 16th rest
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMI don't have a musical reason to disagree with this, however I like the fact that it makes the music cleaner by having less stuff on the page. a dotted 8th and 16th are very recognizable compared to having a space in between.
For my personal take btw, I also use dotted 8ths with staccatos. My thinking is that staccato doesn't necessarily mean "50% of the note value", but rather "play this note short/detached". Also, the difference between a 32nd note in length won't make that much of a difference at this tempo. tl;dr it's fine as is ^^
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMnow that I think about this, would it have been better that I made the pickup measure only a 1/8 instead of a 1/4. I can't make the change now in finale. That would have also avoided that placement of the mf.
Certainly can do that! I can make that change for you once everything else is squared away.
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMI don't have a musical reason to disagree with this, however I like the fact that it makes the music cleaner by having less stuff on the page. a dotted 8th and 16th are very recognizable compared to having a space in between.
When I tried changing this in notepad in finale, that music value/space where the rest would go disappear or I would lose space for the beat itself by using the eraser... I would effectively have to restart the measure from scratch and keep all the beats intact. is this how finale works or is there something else I should be doing? This is nothing like Musescore.
Any way you could fix this with all the formatting?
The updating team (as shown by Bloop's post lol) is in a bit of disagreement but is mostly leaning towards always recommending the approach I described. BUT, we are not going to be requiring this, and I'm not going to stipulate this, just going forward, we will post a "strong" recommendation for what I have suggested.
If you'd like, I'll make this update same as the pickup measure, but otherwise I'm okay with you having it as is.
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMI think this is the same as the above comment the dotted eight?
Not quite, I was saying that m4 should be consistent with however you decide m2, etc. are. m4 beat 1 is same beat length.
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMNo, I hear the En
Ah relistened hearing as En!
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMNo, I hear it rearticulated as it is written
Still going to disagree here, I pitched up the song an octave in Audacity and it sounds like a consistent held pitch. Would relisten and also try what I've suggested, or slowing the track down. To me I could hear how it sounds like two pitches (but isn't) just on how the percussion and LH notes strike on beat 3. To me it also would make sense to sound like this given how m11 2.5 and 3.0 are tied as well, sort of mirroring rhythms.
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMThe LH Tuba line should be the same as the start of the song, but it is much clearer sounding at the start. I hear it as it is written and it sounds Staccato'd. This gives it a march-y feel. The notes being only detached doesn't have the same feel.
I would again recommend pitching up the original audio in Audacity to get a clearer audio picture
Quote from: Fernman on March 06, 2024, 07:50:16 PMI hear you, but in this case it brings the tone of the song down more than my liking.
Okay that's fine can leave as is. Doesn't bring tone down to me, but makes it a bit fuller sounding.
QuoteI removed the forte since that was an old thought. I wanted the crescendo since it is natural to increase in dynamics climbing those notes and to the end of the song for a grand finish.
However, given the feedback from my Versus select arrangement that the crescendo has to go to the next level, in this case forte, then I'll pass. Not that I'm entirely opposed to it, but I rather remove the markings and leave it up to interpretation for NSM purposes. And the original I think is fairly even in dynamics in those measures.
so now that the forte was gone, I wanted to suggest perhaps adding an mp at the end of m24, and then you could cres. up to an mf leading up to the repeat symbol. Thoughts?
QuoteI'm not sure if I can edit the 8va in notepad (if so let me know how), and this is interesting to know for the rest of my arranging. However since this is formatting could you handle this and the other stuff you pointed out please.
Certainly can handle this as well!
Outside of responses above with some thoughts for you, had a few other small things.
• m3 RH, you could make layer 2 last three beats, I hear on beat 2 an F# quarter note, and then a Gn quarter on beat 3 before the current one on beat 4.
• m12 and m30, the half rests in these measures could go to "normal" rest height placement in the measure. Would look slightly neater that way, and also a bit closer to the height of the other notes in these layers.
• Another preference/recommendation item (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?topic=11591.msg422477#msg422477), when you have multiple layers of notes, can choose to have staccatos center above stem or notehead (this is another recommendation, ex. at m3 RH beat 1 we would recommend positioning the staccato over the notehead and not stem where it is now). Lmk if you prefer to keep as is, but I can make the change
• This is more a reminder for myself, but Stadium text on page two should have quotation marks around it.
Regarding the dotted eigth & sixteenth, I would rather keep it as written as I too interpret it as "play it short" instead of divide by 2.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 10, 2024, 07:12:36 PMNot quite, I was saying that m4 should be consistent with however you decide m2, etc. are. m4 beat 1 is same beat length.
Fixed
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 10, 2024, 07:12:36 PMStill going to disagree here, I pitched up the song an octave in Audacity and it sounds like a consistent held pitch. Would relisten and also try what I've suggested, or slowing the track down. To me I could hear how it sounds like two pitches (but isn't) just on how the percussion and LH notes strike on beat 3. To me it also would make sense to sound like this given how m11 2.5 and 3.0 are tied as well, sort of mirroring rhythms.
Regarding m13, I wouldn't compare it to m11 because technically both voices currently arranged overlap in the OST, so it would be separate articulations.
Not sure how to go about resolving this. I uploaded the file to Bandlab and recorded what I heard as separate articulations in the original, ptiched up, and slowed down pitched up.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1VUtDaaRPLdwv9n4NVF-JryUjPz8XrKWv?usp=sharing
Musically it makes more sense to have a rearticulated note to keep the song going than a held note that keeps it less interesting.
Or we agree to disagree.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 10, 2024, 07:12:36 PMI would again recommend pitching up the original audio in Audacity to get a clearer audio picture
Ok I hear what you are pointing out on m19. I'm not trying to blend the horn and the low notes you pointed out. I don't like the low notes themselves because they are boring half notes, and the horn is mostly present in the RH, and if I include the horn in the LH it will force me to add the triplets in the LH, which makes it lots more complicated to play against those 16th notes.
Instead I want to take descending tuba heard in m3. It fits well.
If this is not acceptable I can switch back the strings which would require me switching measures 20 to be like measure 4.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 10, 2024, 07:12:36 PMso now that the forte was gone, I wanted to suggest perhaps adding an mp at the end of m24, and then you could cres. up to an mf leading up to the repeat symbol. Thoughts?
No, since it is a grand march I'm thinking it can't go less than mf. Only moving between mf and f. and move deliberately in m28 than a gradual increase over many measures. I'm good with no dynamic markings.
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 10, 2024, 07:12:36 PM• m3 RH, you could make layer 2 last three beats, I hear on beat 2 an F# quarter note, and then a Gn quarter on beat 3 before the current one on beat 4.
Added
You may do whatever formatting to the staccato you'd like. the staccatos don't seemed well placed in finale and if I have to drag around that dot, I'll pass.
Quote from: Fernman on March 11, 2024, 07:14:25 PMRegarding the dotted eigth & sixteenth, I would rather keep it as written as I too interpret it as "play it short" instead of divide by 2.
Okay, will not make any changes there.
Quote from: Fernman on March 11, 2024, 07:14:25 PMRegarding m13, I wouldn't compare it to m11 because technically both voices currently arranged overlap in the OST, so it would be separate articulations.
Not sure how to go about resolving this. I uploaded the file to Bandlab and recorded what I heard as separate articulations in the original, ptiched up, and slowed down pitched up.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1VUtDaaRPLdwv9n4NVF-JryUjPz8XrKWv?usp=sharing
Musically it makes more sense to have a rearticulated note to keep the song going than a held note that keeps it less interesting.
Or we agree to disagree.
I'm still hearing it as a held pitch - but clearly Bloop didn't say anything about it and at this point I'm fine with saying 2 to 1 on this and keeping it as you have it. Just for future reference though, when I was saying pitching up, I should have clarified I meant I was pitching up the track a full octave. That's one way to pull out basslines easier and also to theoretically make situations like this a little clearer. I use Audacity, I assume Bandlab has that same pitch up by octave feature, but here's a screenshot of what it looks like in Audacity.
Spoiler
(https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;attach=52662;)
Quote from: Fernman on March 11, 2024, 07:14:25 PMOk I hear what you are pointing out on m19. I'm not trying to blend the horn and the low notes you pointed out. I don't like the low notes themselves because they are boring half notes, and the horn is mostly present in the RH, and if I include the horn in the LH it will force me to add the triplets in the LH, which makes it lots more complicated to play against those 16th notes.
Instead I want to take descending tuba heard in m3. It fits well.
If this is not acceptable I can switch back the strings which would require me switching measures 20 to be like measure 4.
This seems atypical to our standards, to take exact heard phrase from one measure and to then take over to another whole measure as a matter of preference. Personally, I've never seen it and don't really like the idea of it - what are your thoughts on the following quarter notes instead: Bn An Gn En? These are more in line with the held notes and chords anyway, and still maintains that rhythm you want.
Quote from: Fernman on March 11, 2024, 07:14:25 PMNo, since it is a grand march I'm thinking it can't go less than mf. Only moving between mf and f. and move deliberately in m28 than a gradual increase over many measures. I'm good with no dynamic markings.
Added
Okay! Was just an idea but it is a fairly consistent piece dynamically so not a big deal to me
QuoteYou may do whatever formatting to the staccato you'd like. the staccatos don't seemed well placed in finale and if I have to drag around that dot, I'll pass.
Will get to this after your response on m19. Otherwise I have nothing else to add
Quote from: Kricketune54 on March 12, 2024, 07:24:44 PMThis seems atypical to our standards, to take exact heard phrase from one measure and to then take over to another whole measure as a matter of preference. Personally, I've never seen it and don't really like the idea of it -
On paper as written above the idea does make one scratch their heads.
In context though the song effectively repeats the first 8 measures beginning at m17, so using a part of the song that was originally written to accompany the melody isn't as far-fetched as it sounds. Though my creative side digresses...
Anyway, I switched it back to the strings part which I liked from the beginning.
Okay. I feel like this part is similar enough that it captures m3 and m19 enough. Fine to be used in two places. Will accept, but will be making a number of edits as the file appears to have gotten jumbled between the copy paste.
EDIT
following updates made:
- updated formatting to new template
- Fixed staccato placement for 2nd layers (above notehead)
- moved some rests around
- moved 8va to more reflect recommended formatting
This submission has been accepted by Kricketune54 (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=6528).
~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot