Submission Information:
Series: The Legend of Zelda
Game: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Console: Nintendo Wii
Title: The Legend of Zelda: Orchestra Piece #2
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Zeila (http://forum.ninsheetmusic.org/index.php?action=profile;u=4766)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sDk9LM60qg
bump
Great Arrangement!
some feedback:
-M.1: Maybe have octaves in the right hand to give it more power.
-M.19-33: I think it would be great if you incorporated the drum hits on the 4rth beats during this part.
-M.26 & 30: Consider having the right hand play the high fast flute parts, instead of what you have now.
-M.46-50: Consider redoing this part a bit. What I'm thinking of is that the ascending brass notes on the 1st and 3rd beat are very clear but you doesn't have that in your arrangement. Maybe have that in the LH. And maybe have the RH do more 16th-notes runs instead.
-M.51-55: I'm pretty sure there are more notes than just octaves in this part, and including them only makes this part better, since it would sound less empty than just having octaves.
-M.55: Alternatively you could end the arrangement on a tremolo in the LH between the low A and the higher A, rather than a half note, this also represent the drum roll in the original better.
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on May 14, 2016, 04:49:08 AMGreat Arrangement!
Thanks! (and also for the feedback as well)
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on May 14, 2016, 04:49:08 AM-M.1: Maybe have octaves in the right hand to give it more power.
Added (at an octave above). I guess it would also coincide with the LH part then (and also since multiple instruments play that)
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on May 14, 2016, 04:49:08 AM-M.19-33: I think it would be great if you incorporated the drum hits on the 4rth beats during this part.
I did that, but only for m19-26 (since the others are rolls I believe)
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on May 14, 2016, 04:49:08 AM-M.26 & 30: Consider having the right hand play the high fast flute parts, instead of what you have now.
Done
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on May 14, 2016, 04:49:08 AM-M.46-50: Consider redoing this part a bit. What I'm thinking of is that the ascending brass notes on the 1st and 3rd beat are very clear but you doesn't have that in your arrangement. Maybe have that in the LH. And maybe have the RH do more 16th-notes runs instead.
While I agree that the brass is stronger (or at least louder) than the 16th-note runs, I think what I have is a nice balance between the brass part and the 16th-note runs (albeit more difficult). If I add it to the melody, I feel like it would interfere too much, and I'd rather not sacrifice another part just to add notes on beats 2.5 and 3 (which are the same as beats 1 and 4.5). I tried adding some of the brass notes to the RH part, however
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on May 14, 2016, 04:49:08 AM-M.51-55: I'm pretty sure there are more notes than just octaves in this part, and including them only makes this part better, since it would sound less empty than just having octaves.
Added to RH
Quote from: Tobbeh99 on May 14, 2016, 04:49:08 AM-M.55: Alternatively you could end the arrangement on a tremolo in the LH between the low A and the higher A, rather than a half note, this also represent the drum roll in the original better.
Added (and put a marking to indicate that it's optional). The sound kind of bugs out though due to the fermata
Made a very minor change with the brackets (so now they are custom lines and the hooks are equal in length)
(also bump)
Nice sheet. Always interesting to see how people arrange orchestral pieces for solo piano.
- The tie on the lower E overlaps the notes in measure 23. I'd remove it altogether since you re-strike that E in the measure (meaning you can't hold it that long anyway).
- Seems like an awkward place to put the eighth rest in measure 26...
- Layer work in 47+, LH: Make sure to keep stem direction and rest positioning consistent for the top and bottom layer.
- The .mus file has some problems with doubled accidentals in 49-50: [see here] (http://forum.ninsheetmusic.org/index.php?topic=8444.msg341117#msg341117). (Not just the two flats on the same note, E flats are reiterated for both layers.)
Yay. A zelda arrangement!
Some things I noticed:
- Might I recommend this extra note for M. 2-5? I definitely here a cello/bass/brass instrument an octave higher than the low one.
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/sot1pu5ikawomer/Screenshot%202016-06-01%2011.26.20.png?dl=1)
- In M. 6 (and others like it) the notes are A & E. Also, the way you have the hand crossings set up is a little confusing. Might I recommend these 2 options.
1.
Pro: Not that big of a hand jump.
Con: If you use this method throughout the piece, the bass may start to clash with the notes in the second layer.
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/9btv3lrndyr412p/Screenshot%202016-06-01%2011.33.10.png?dl=1)
2.
Pro: Having it an octave higher like this makes it much cleaner and looks pretty pro.
Con: A bigger hand jump.
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/9z23hgdx7gytea4/Screenshot%202016-06-01%2011.35.32.png?dl=1)
I'd recommend 2 since it's easier to read and would clash with other layers/notes less throughout the piece, but that second layer/voice will need to be switched between the hands quite a few times.
That's all I have for now. There may be more, but I'll see what you do with this above feedback first :)
Bar 11-12 LH: Flip the stems.
Bar 23: As another option, if you really want to keep the tie, you can use the tie tool to bend it into shape to avoid collisions.
Quote from: Latios212 on May 30, 2016, 10:05:55 PMNice sheet. Always interesting to see how people arrange orchestral pieces for solo piano.
Thanks! Yea, there's a lot to consider and I'm sure that two arrangements of equal quality would be different in terms of what parts are there and how it's notated
Quote from: Latios212 on May 30, 2016, 10:05:55 PM- The tie on the lower E overlaps the notes in measure 23. I'd remove it altogether since you re-strike that E in the measure (meaning you can't hold it that long anyway).
Quote from: Deku Trombonist on June 01, 2016, 06:55:18 PMBar 23: As another option, if you really want to keep the tie, you can use the tie tool to bend it into shape to avoid collisions.
I ended up getting rid of the bottom E note altogether in m23/24
Quote from: Latios212 on May 30, 2016, 10:05:55 PM- Seems like an awkward place to put the eighth rest in measure 26...
For some reason I thought that would be better than putting it above the staff. It has been switched
Quote from: Latios212 on May 30, 2016, 10:05:55 PM- Layer work in 47+, LH: Make sure to keep stem direction and rest positioning consistent for the top and bottom layer.
I changed it to where the 2nd layer is upwards and vice versa (aside from the half note in m50
Quote from: Latios212 on May 30, 2016, 10:05:55 PM- The .mus file has some problems with doubled accidentals in 49-50: [see here] (http://forum.ninsheetmusic.org/index.php?topic=8444.msg341117#msg341117). (Not just the two flats on the same note, E flats are reiterated for both layers.)
Fixed
Quote from: Sebastian on June 01, 2016, 08:40:23 AMYay. A zelda arrangement!
Yay. Feedback!
Quote from: Sebastian on June 01, 2016, 08:40:23 AM- Might I recommend this extra note for M. 2-5? I definitely here a cello/bass/brass instrument an octave higher than the low one.
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/sot1pu5ikawomer/Screenshot%202016-06-01%2011.26.20.png?dl=1)
Added
Quote from: Sebastian on June 01, 2016, 08:40:23 AM- In M. 6 (and others like it) the notes are A & E.
I'm not hearing an E at all (even if it is actual an E, it sounds like it's higher than the A). Also, unless you made a mistake with the measure number (or implied it with "and others like it"), it sounds similar to m5. Maybe someone else can chime in. About m9+others, did you have anything against that as well?
Quote from: Sebastian on June 01, 2016, 08:40:23 AMAlso, the way you have the hand crossings set up is a little confusing. Might I recommend these 2 options.
1.
Pro: Not that big of a hand jump.
Con: If you use this method throughout the piece, the bass may start to clash with the notes in the second layer.
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/9btv3lrndyr412p/Screenshot%202016-06-01%2011.33.10.png?dl=1)
2.
Pro: Having it an octave higher like this makes it much cleaner and looks pretty pro.
Con: A bigger hand jump.
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/9z23hgdx7gytea4/Screenshot%202016-06-01%2011.35.32.png?dl=1)
I'd recommend 2 since it's easier to read and would clash with other layers/notes less throughout the piece, but that second layer/voice will need to be switched between the hands quite a few times.
That's all I have for now. There may be more, but I'll see what you do with this above feedback first :)
A few comments/questions:
- Notating it either way would almost be the same as if I got rid of the LH and bracket markings. The only difference I can tell is that there would just be more ledger lines. Since I don't agree with the lower E and that was probably part of the reason why you notated it entirely in the bass clef, I'm scratching out option 1. I also don't think it's necessary to raise it up an octave
- I don't see how it would clash for the 1st option (unless you meant it's unplayable with one hand)
- About using lines, isn't that for signifying that the voice is moving between staves and not the hand itself (correct me if I'm wrong)? That's why I had the brackets in the first place.
Regardless, since you said it was slightly confusing, I decided to cross staff instead of using brackets. If the majority of people think using brackets instead of cross staffing is better (or someone else comes up with an even better solution), then I can change it
Quote from: Deku Trombonist on June 01, 2016, 06:55:18 PMBar 11-12 LH: Flip the stems.
Since I ended up changing the way I notated it, 11 was flipped while 12 was not
I'm sorry. My explanation was terrible. xD
Let me clarify.
Quote from: Zeila on June 02, 2016, 01:38:08 AMI'm not hearing an E at all (even if it is actual an E, it sounds like it's higher than the A).
I'm definitely hearing an A & E. The A and E below middle C to be exact; however, I think it might be hard to play, so bringing it up an octave might be a good idea. What do you think of this?
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/39aus0qx8ptcw8c/Screenshot%202016-06-02%2011.18.35.png?dl=1)
Quote from: Zeila on June 02, 2016, 01:38:08 AMAlso, unless you made a mistake with the measure number (or implied it with "and others like it"), it sounds similar to m5. Maybe someone else can chime in.
My bad. I think the pic covers this measure.
Quote from: Zeila on June 02, 2016, 01:38:08 AMAbout m9+others, did you have anything against that as well?
Since those are similar (not in notes, but in playing style) to M. 5+, I say we start with those measures and get a good foundation as to what we're gonna do before moving on to those measures, so we don't bite off more than we can chew.....to borrow the colloquialism.
Quote from: Zeila on June 02, 2016, 01:38:08 AM- Notating it either way would almost be the same as if I got rid of the LH and bracket markings. The only difference I can tell is that there would just be more ledger lines. Since I don't agree with the lower E and that was probably part of the reason why you notated it entirely in the bass clef, I'm scratching out option 1. I also don't think it's necessary to raise it up an octave
I brought that voice up an octave to accommodate for that extra bass whole note. Having that in will clash with that voice. Also, the right hand should be able to play that voice as well if it's moved up an octave. It's totally up to you though!
Quote from: Zeila on June 02, 2016, 01:38:08 AM- I don't see how it would clash for the 1st option (unless you meant it's unplayable with one hand)
It would clash if you add the extra bass whole note, but, again, it's up to you.
Quote from: Zeila on June 02, 2016, 01:38:08 AM- About using lines, isn't that for signifying that the voice is moving between staves and not the hand itself (correct me if I'm wrong)? That's why I had the brackets in the first place.
A solid line signifies a hand crossing from one staff to another. A dashed line signifies a voice crossing from one staff to the other.
Quote from: Sebastian on June 02, 2016, 08:26:06 AMI'm sorry. My explanation was terrible. xD
Let me clarify.
I'm definitely hearing an A & E. The A and E below middle C to be exact; however, I think it might be hard to play, so bringing it up an octave might be a good idea. What do you think of this?
Spoiler
(https://www.dropbox.com/s/39aus0qx8ptcw8c/Screenshot%202016-06-02%2011.18.35.png?dl=1)
It would clash if you add the extra bass whole note, but, again, it's up to you.
I still don't hear an E, and in the case that you are actually right, I'd rather forgo the octave in the LH. If there are concerns about the RH interval at some parts, I could notate that the LH plays that. Or I could invert the dyad or bring it up an octave if it is deemed to be necessary. Also, instead of the A and C you put whenever it rises, I'm hearing a C and F, and in m8 it sounds like it goes back to the original notes
Quote from: Sebastian on June 02, 2016, 08:26:06 AMSince those are similar (not in notes, but in playing style) to M. 5+, I say we start with those measures and get a good foundation as to what we're gonna do before moving on to those measures, so we don't bite off more than we can chew.....to borrow the colloquialism.
Fair enough
Quote from: Sebastian on June 02, 2016, 08:26:06 AMA solid line signifies a hand crossing from one staff to another. A dashed line signifies a voice crossing from one staff to the other.
Oh, ok. Thanks for letting me know the difference
I'd rather not make any changes until I get a second opinion as they would be based off of whatever the 2nd layer notes actually are (to an extent)
One quick thing I noticed; M. 45, the A flat should be a G sharp, since you're currently in A minor. I think.
That's odd, I must've changed it because there's already a cautionary accidental on the G in the next measure. Anyways, fixed (although not in the OP, as I'll just wait until there's something more substantial to fix since this is minor). Thanks!
The A & E are definitely there in bar 6.
Ok, my mistake then. Also, since it would be easier, I ended up doing it Sebastian's way after all. However, instead of the Gb and B in m8, I put an E and A, and instead of the A and C in m7, I put a G and C (all 2nd layer). I changed it for all instances
Hmm, I wonder if more of the harmonies could make their way into the first bar. I know it's pretty thickly scored so picking out notes can be a bit tough, but I reckon it's worth a shot.
I tried
Bump
Since I just saw the ending of Twilight Princess HD, this jumped out at me: this is the second theme that plays during the credits, so I'm not sure that Orchestra Piece #2 is the proper name for it.
I've never heard it referenced as anything other than Orchestra Piece #2, and the HD Sound Selection (http://zeldawiki.org/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Twilight_Princess_HD_Sound_Selection) lists it as "The Legend of Zelda: Orchestra Piece (Teaser Music) #2." I omitted the parenthesis part since I didn't think that was necessary and it would've made the title too long, but if it is then I can put it in
Bump
Bump
I'm going to use m. 1 as a sort of microcosm of my thoughts on the whole arrangement.
There's a fundamental difference between glissandi on piano and the harp that makes translation between the two mediums inexact. A concert harp uses pedals that can chromatically alter the pitches of the strings, and therefore a harpist can execute glissandi on any scale he or she pleases. For this song, that would be D minor. A piano cannot do this, except on a C major scale (white key gliss.) or a pentatonic scale (black key gliss.). That means, for a piano transcription of this song, you would have to either: (1) manually finger the a D minor scale starting from F3 up to D6 all in the time of a half-beat (egad!), or; (2) reinterpret the passage as something more pianistically viable, such as an octuplet D minor 1st inversion arpeggio in unmeasured time.
There are also pitch errors in m. 1 (chords are Dm, Ebmaj7(add13), C(add4)/E, and Fsus2), but that's not my concern really. Rather, it is timbre and color. Just like how an orchestrator will use different instrument classes to create various sonic images, so too must you consider the the different ranges and registers of the piano as different instruments. For example, instead of writing that block 4-note C major 1st inversion chord crammed together in LH the bass register in beat 3 (resulting in a blurred, muddy sound), you could have spaced it out wider by utilizing the untapped mid and upper ranges of the piano (as per the concepts of close vs openly spaced harmony).
Thanks for the tips, Bespinben! I changed both glissandi so now the pickup measure is a septuplet and m50 is now a sixteenth note arpeggio. I also tried experimenting with m1, but it may still need some improvements
Other changes:
- Got rid of the 8va in m1 and lowered the septuplet by an octave
- Put staccatos on beat 1 from m43-45
- Got rid of the 5ths in the 1st layer LH and changed the eighth notes on beat 3 RH to quarter notes from m47-50
- Changed a few stem directions
Just a thought, expanding on Bespinben's comment of using the different registers of the piano. At the last measure, I would include the C# in the right hand, to make it a resounding A major chord (personal thing). I would also lower the tremolo an octave to better imitate the timpani.
Thanks for the suggestion! Done.
Bump
Bump
Bump
I really, really hate to do this after everyone spent so much time on this, but one of two things needs to happen.
1. This piece gets a major revamp
2. This piece is removed from submissions
Apathy will probably result in:
3. This piece is left alone.
Why is there no "4. Updaters help"? Well, this piece needs a large change in direction, but, well, the updaters are for accepting and giving tips, not major direction changes. I say this because it's just .... lacking. It lacks the punch and full feel of the original. I don't mean to downplay your skills as an arranger, but at no point do I feel like it's comparable to the original. It's just ok. Keep in mind this is a terribly difficult song to capture on piano. What you've written just lacks the extra oomph that it needs, and it needs more than I can give it. The choice is yours.
I'll just remove it for now and work on it another day. Thanks everyone for the help!