Submission Information:
Series: Pokémon
Game: Pokémon Red/Blue/Yellow
Console: Game Boy
Title: Caves of Mt. Moon
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Zunawe (http://forum.ninsheetmusic.org/index.php?action=profile;u=3325)
Replacement Information:
Links to Existing Sheet: MUS (http://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/mus/605) | MIDI (http://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/mid/605) | PDF (http://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/605)
Replacement Type: Edit (existing arranger remains)
[attachment deleted by admin]
This is part of the arrangement project, but I expect it may take a bit more discussion than some of the others.
Previous discussion topic concerning time signature. (http://forum.ninsheetmusic.org/index.php?topic=6254.0)
While I understand that 4/4 is viable (and why), I personally still hear 8/8, and I don't see a significant reason to write it in 4/4 instead. Getting this uploaded is still a primary concern though.
I feel like this never-ending discussion over the meter of this piece has led to an impasse causing the old, bad sheet on site remain longer than it needs to be. Therefore, the subject will be waived. However, understand that should the opinion on this change, your sheet is still liable to be challenged by a new arranger in the future, which is very much a possibility given there are a total of 4 different sheets of Mt. Moon lurking around the forums.
You can improve in other ways though. The measure layout could use a lot of work.
Measure 21 is a single measure system -- EEK!
Measure 29 as well.
The 3/4 parts in m. 13 and m. 19 are too widely spaced (could fit another measure in from elsewhere).
All 10/8 measures have been locked with the next measure.
Connecting the 3/4 measures with the 4/4 measures squishes the sixteenths to a near unreadable level. Connecting the 3/4 with the 10/8 is possible, but then it wouldn't follow the format of the next phrases. Connecting the 3/4 to the previous 8/8 kinda disconnects the ending of the first section.
Now, while I'll agree that there should be a good balance between what looks good and phrase breaks, I think that the inconsistency and overall unconventionality of this piece might warrant a little "ugliness" in order to make the phrases a little clearer. For example, having two two-bar lines for each phrase that starts in 10/8 makes the differences in time signatures a bit easier to follow. So while I don't particularly like the inconsistency in measures per bar, I'd rather it be easier to follow.
Edit: Also, will change rit. to molto rit. for next edit in measure 15.
8/8, huh? Cus It wouldn't be practical to conduct all 8 beats in that manner lol. You'd see something like this conducted in 4/4, it's just syncopation.
Imo the 4/4 - 5/4 switches would work much nicer than the 8/8 - 10/8 switches. There's no sense in over-complicating it for the sake of it being complex :/
Edit: posting this again
Quote from: Olimar12345 on June 05, 2014, 01:42:36 PMHopefully this example will help you see what Jompa and I (mostly Jompa) are talking about.
If we take a popular piano piece, like say Joplin's "The Entertainer" and transcribe it in this fashion, it could potentially look like this:
[The Entertainer 1] (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59554832/nsm/entertainer.MUS)
When in reality, it was written like this:
[The Entertainer 2] (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/59554832/nsm/entertainer2.mus)
See the difference between the syncopation and the time signatures?
Version 1 is how you're seeing it, version 2 is how I'm seeing it. Other than this issue, I really love this arrangement.
So what's happening with this sheet? It'd be easier bookkeeping if it was held until the R/B/Y project update so we can update the whole OST all at once. But still, if we finish the timesig discussion here first that'd be great.
I think (like Bespinben said) it's causing the god-awful version to remain on here for too long, regardless of which (equivalent) time signature is better.
It's also easier to read (to me, at least) a sheet in 4/4 versus 8/8. And, while we remain true to the original, if it isn't a vital difference, as in this case, I think we're better off not overthinking it.
Sorry. I've been busy for a few days with housing stuffs.
Changed all 8/8 to 4/4 unless there are cries against it.
I still like the 10/8 for its own measure, but it's a little weird going from 10/8 to 4/4 to x/8. If it were to be changed to 5/4, how should eighths be grouped and the top line written?
EDIT: Also, whether this goes up on its own or with the rest of the game's ost doesn't matter to me. As long as it's in a relatively timely manner.
Here's a thought given to me by the higher powers.
(if Finale can do this) put the top staff in 5/4, and the bottom in 10/8. Essentially it's read as a polyrhythm, keeping the 10/8 in time with the 5/4 (an easy task considering it's completely divisible by two). This shows up in all kinds of 20th century music.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/dh54c5qox3qywhi/17%20-%20Caves%20of%20Mt.%20Moon.mus?dl=1 (https://www.dropbox.com/s/dh54c5qox3qywhi/17%20-%20Caves%20of%20Mt.%20Moon.mus?dl=1)
Not sure about time signature still (who has the final word on this anyway?) but fixed a couple of things:
- Title
- Measure distribution
- Note durations in 10/8 measures
- Clef change in m. 25-28
- Put voices in m. 39 into both staves
Quote from: Zunawe on June 25, 2015, 11:13:52 PMIf it were to be changed to 5/4, how should eighths be grouped and the top line written?
It would make even more sense in 5 imo, since it seems to be a regular 4/4 measure with an additional beat up front. kind of like a 1+4. Like this:
(https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fs9.postimg.org%2Fggosnhonj%2FScreenshot_2015_07_01_21_16_30.png&hash=937d18d7764b7593c69b3c9148d619253686e88f) (http://postimage.org/)
10/8 changed to 5/4
First measure to the first time change was redistributed to 3 measures per line (+ readability, - group by phrase)
Didn't change the title. The original OST title was "Mt. Moon" whereas "Caves of Mt. Moon" is the Firered/Leafgreen title. Are we using those now?
I personally felt like the duration of the first note in the 5/4 measures was perfect, but it isn't the most distinct release.
I suppose a clef change is possible, but the player literally just has to put their thumb on middle c and read a third and a fifth for everything you changed clef for. Is it really necessary to add that just so the notes are in the staff?
Whatever you did in measure 39 was audible but not visible for some reason. Maybe Notepad is having difficulty with layers.
I also changed the current layering in measure 39 to make it easier to see the melody (at least in Finale).
JDMEK5 wants us to use FR/LG OST, and the name is the same as the Japanese OST, so I think we're using "Caves of Mt. Moon".
I feel like most of these RH notes are the same length, so keeping everything at dotted quarter note instead of half note would be consistent.
Personally as someone who plays sheets here I prefer a clef change if all the notes are off the staff.
I'll go double check m. 39 when I get home later. Thanks.
Forgot to mention there were a couple other things me and Olimar fixed in the version in the above post, so mind if we go from that?
This submission has been accepted by Bespinben (http://forum.ninsheetmusic.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2510).
~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot