Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: Bionic Commando
Console: Multiplatform
Title: Piano Theme
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Alpacatron (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=7023)
[attachment deleted by admin]
[attachment deleted by admin]
Hi and belated welcome to NSM! For starters, you should change your Arranger Name through the forums so that it'll classify correctly instead of listing Alpacatron
Formatting stuff- There are some inconsistencies with your sheet vs. the formatting guidelines (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?topic=481.0), such as copyright sizes, missing italics/bold, and unaligned text
- The Page layout, spacing, and more (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?topic=11783.0) thread also goes over certain techniques and placings that are either incorrect or unoptimal in your current sheet. A few things of note include the tempo marking and alteration positions, dynamics positionings, measure distributions, and staff spacing.
- After looking over both of those threads, if you need any more specific help then feel free to reach out
- I noticed that measures 18-31 and 38-51 are identical in your sheet, and it seems to be that way in the original song too, so you should just use a repeat marking with 1st and 2nd endings where m32-37 are under the 1st and the current m52-end are under the 2nd. Also measure 37 doesn't seem to exist in the original either, it sounds like it just repeats after measure 36
- For the spots with eight 32nd notes, you could use the beam break tool to split it into two sections of four 32nd notes
- In measure 15, you should slur the grace notes to the attached eighth note
- Flip the tie in measure 21
- Using the ped marking with asterisks concurrently with the line markings seems redundant to me. Just omit the asterisk release since the hook already implies that. Speaking of pedaling, there are other spots that include it where you didn't explicitly write it out. I think it is better to do all or nothing (by nothing I just mean text direction only at the start)
- This could a bit more dynamic variation. For example, in measures 33-36 there is a notable diminuendo and there's more range than just piano here (you did that in m52-end but then you had it decrescendo into piano again when it was already at piano)
Note stuff- m5-6 I'm not hearing those Bb's, were those added in by you?
- m8 you could just use a dotted half note here because it's simple enough by being on beat 1
- m11 beat 3 LH missing upper G octave
- m13 why is there a courtesy accidental on the G?
- m18-20 add an octave below the second note from the top (i.e. low A-Bb-A-Ab-G)
- m23 Bb sounds like B instead
- m33 I think it would be more accurate to shift the subito piano marking to the second eighth note since it sounds like the first chord is still at the previous dynamic level
I didn't go super in depth but this should get you started! Most of the notes were already there, so it's mainly just presentation issues
Hello, and thanks for the welcome!
I looked through my Profile, and can't find where I would edit my "Arranger Name" specifically.
Formatting
I have now corrected the copyright size, and italics in credits. I'm unsure if there are other corrections to be made.
I took your advice for the repeat with two endings, this makes sense, however I'm not sure what you meant about measure 37?
I have now broken the beams on the 32nd note runs.
I have now slurred the grace notes, however due to size I can't get the slur to actually appear.
I have now flipped the tie in measure 21.
I adjusted the pedal markings.
Note stuff
The high Bbs are there in the original recording.
For the dotted half note, I am actually using the original arrangers preferred notation for this (I know him), so as not to "break" the 3rd beat.
For the octaves in m11, same thing, this is how it was played as per the original arranger/performer.
m13, courtesy accidental removed.
m18-20, again this is per the arranger/performers preference.
m.23 B's adjusted, thank you for catching this!
Quote from: Alpacatron on July 05, 2021, 07:05:03 PMI looked through my Profile, and can't find where I would edit my "Arranger Name" specifically.
Hmm I remember it being there before, but that's okay because Latios or someone else could change it for you if necessary
Quote from: Alpacatron on July 05, 2021, 07:05:03 PMI have now corrected the copyright size, and italics in credits. I'm unsure if there are other corrections to be made.
It's not entirely fixed, so here's a list of things that would also need to be changed:
- Composer text needs to be bold
- Game subtitle needs to be italicized
- Missing "Piano" staff instrument name at the start
- This is very subtle but the arranger info was just slightly misaligned to the right, and the subtitle wasn't aligned to the center either
- Copyright and header info are outside of the margins
- Tempo marking should be aligned with the time signature
Apart from that, there are still visual improvements to be made even after your adjustments. I'll break it down into points to make it easier to digest
- The first page looks cramped while the last page has all this excess space. I would recommend putting 4 systems on the first, 5 on the second, and 3 on the third. This way, the credit text also would have more room to spread out
- You could just put Rubato with the tempo marking so you could put the piano dynamic by the notes (this is just a suggestion)
- Speaking of tempo markings, I've seen alterations/modifiers like rit. and accel. in the middle of the staff, but not "a tempo". This is more of an observation than anything
- I don't understand that line by the accel. on the first system. Is it a pedal marking or a duration specifier? If it's the former, then it should be below the staff and accompanied with "Ped." to be consistent with the other spots, and if it's the latter then it should be a dashed line just like the ones with the ritardandos
- Dynamic hairpins should be in between the staves instead of below (except for rare cases or where it only applies to one staff). And do try to align them with the adjacent dynamics if possible
- It would look better if the "Ped." text were horizontally aligned with the line markings instead of being on top of them
- The arpeggio markings are clashing with accidentals and noteheads, plus they aren't centered well. Additionally, in some spots like measure 30, you could add between 0.02-0.06 of extra space at the beginning under measure attributes so that the markings aren't too close to the barlines or notes
- Just noticed this, but the courtesy accidental on the E of measure 11 also isn't necessary
- Another thing I just noticed but the first tie in measure 16 should also be flipped so that it's consistent with the following two ties
- In measure 22, "a tempo" should be moved down a bit so it's not colliding with the note stem
- In measure 33, the subito piano marking is colliding with some stems, so you could either increase the inner staff distance or shift it down a bit
- The first and second endings are colliding with the notes, so they should be raised
- I think the rit. in the last system should be above the staff to create space for the hairpin and avoid colliding with the piano marking (same goes for the other spot where there's a rit. and decrescendo in the same measure too)
I made most of these changes for you, but the rest is up to your preference. Also in measure 8, the crescendo overlaps with some notes so you could either just write "cresc." instead or increase the staff spacing to make more room. A lot of these small changes add up and can make a big difference in terms of legibility, so just keep these points in mind for future reference
[MUSX] (https://www.dropbox.com/s/vtr4a00aodd32p5/Bionic%20Commando1000.musx?dl=1)
Okay that's it for formatting, so these are just replies to your comments
Quote from: Alpacatron on July 05, 2021, 07:05:03 PMI took your advice for the repeat with two endings, this makes sense, however I'm not sure what you meant about measure 37?
To me it sounds like you put extra notes when it repeats to measure 18 after the last A of measure 36
Quote from: Alpacatron on July 05, 2021, 07:05:03 PMI have now broken the beams on the 32nd note runs.
I should've clarified more, but I meant to split it up so that there's only one beam connecting the two groups instead of zero or three
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/844691335025655819/862101075301629982/unknown.png
Quote from: Alpacatron on July 05, 2021, 07:05:03 PMI have now slurred the grace notes, however due to size I can't get the slur to actually appear.
It looks like you put a tie instead of a slur
Quote from: Alpacatron on July 05, 2021, 07:05:03 PMThe high Bbs are there in the original recording.
I meant the Bbs in the LH, but if that's what you were talking about then okay
Quote from: Alpacatron on July 05, 2021, 07:05:03 PMFor the octaves in m11, same thing, this is how it was played as per the original arranger/performer.
m18-20, again this is per the arranger/performers preference.
It really does sound different in the video (and I just noticed but it also sounds like there's no G eighth note on beat 3 of measure 20 in the LH, nor is there a mordent in the RH), but I can't argue against insider knowledge
Everything else is fine :3
I posted a reply, but I don't see it now... so hopefully I'm not duplicating it here!
Thank you so much for implementing these changes for me, I really appreciate it!
I adjusted a few other things based on your recomendations as well.
My only other comment is regarding that mordent, I looked back and realized it was actually just the artist's "preference" that it be there, he didn't actually record it that way for the soundtrack. I've removed it now.
I've updated all the docs again to reflect the current updated version.
Sorry for the wait!
Here's an annotated PDF that might help, but all of the feedback in there (plus more) is listed below: https://www.dropbox.com/s/z0cauupeqb2gwy6/Bionic%20Commando%202.pdf?dl=0
- It would probably be clearer to just list both Junko Tamiya and José Luis Gonzales Castro as composers. Right now, the distinction between "Arranged by" and "Transcribed by" makes it a bit ambiguous to figure out who actually created the sheet itself (what you have is completely accurate, but confusing IMO).
- It seems like the tempo starts out around 60 BPM, then at m9 it increases to 77 BPM, and then it fluctuates from the low to the high 70s for the rest of the piece (based on using this: https://www.all8.com/tools/bpm.htm). I would suggesting starting out with q=60 at m1 and then increasing to q=76 at m9, since 60 and 76 are found on analog metronomes. (On top of the tempo markings, you could also add a direction like "Più mosso" to m9 since there's a pretty significant shift there.)
- In places where there are four consecutive eighth notes on either beats 1-2 or beats 3-4, like m4 RH beats 3-4, all four eighths should be beamed together. If you're using full Finale, you can go to Documents > Document Options > Beams and check "Beam Four Eighth Notes Together in Common Time," then "OK," then highlight all measures and go to Utilities > Rebeam > Rebeam Music.
- In places where you have a quarter note on beat 2 tied to a quarter note on beat 3, you can write those as half notes—this is one of the cases where hiding beat 3 is fine because it's such a simple rhythm. I've circled them in the PDF above.
- Similarly, m8 LH can be a dotted half.
- In m16, you don't need to write everything as tied layers—you can just write the top notes as a single layer (quarter-quarter-half) because the pedal will sustain them anyway.
- Maybe a fermata on m17 beat 4?
- I don't hear the G# on m25 RH beat 1.
- In m26, I think I hear the LH playing octaves on beats 1-3 (i.e. another E above the one you already have written).
- I don't really hear the chords in m26/28/30 being rolled like you've written them. If you want to keep them for effect, though, that's fine.
- m32 LH beat 1 should be an F instead of an A.
- In m33/38, I don't hear the upper octave in the RH on beats 2-3.
- m37 seems like an extra measure that isn't actually in the original—it should be deleted altogether.
- In m40, the last D in the LH actually starts on beat 1, not beat 3. m40 LH doesn't have any eighth notes.
- The fermatas in the last measure are a bit misaligned—they should be centered with the notehead, but right now they're too far right. (I'm not sure why that is—maybe try deleting and re-entering them?) Also, I didn't mention this in the PDF, but the fermata in the LH should also be above the note, instead of below.
That's it for now—aside from a very small number of things I listed, the notes were perfect (great job!). Let me know if you need any help with these changes. Once these are done, I'll give a few more comments to help you clean up the minor visual stuff, and that'll be it.
Thank you for the feedback!
For the eighth notes beaming, I don't mind changing it, my preference is how I had it, but I am primarily Jazz-trained.
As for a half-note from beats 2 to 3, I would prefer to avoid this, due to my own preference, but also the original composer's/arranger's.
If it really needs to be a half-note in order to be hosted here, I can make the change.
For mm25-28 and mm32-38, I have the notation as per the arranger/performer's confirmation.
I have removed m37, thank you for noticing that!
Same for m40 and fermatas!
Quote from: Alpacatron on August 18, 2021, 06:33:10 PMAs for a half-note from beats 2 to 3, I would prefer to avoid this, due to my own preference, but also the original composer's/arranger's.
If it really needs to be a half-note in order to be hosted here, I can make the change.
- It's recommended, but not required. Our view is that it looks messier to have the two notes written out with a tie and would still be equally as clear to read as a half note, but if you feel strongly about it, you can keep it as is. However, I would strongly encourage using a dotted half note in m8; instances like those are what dotted half notes are for in the first place.
- As an alternative to writing half notes on beat 2, you might consider writing the eighth-tied-quarter as a dotted quarter in places like m10/12 RH to avoid having three notes tied in succession, which looks a bit cluttered.
- The composer info extends too far left (reaching the subtitle) right now, so you could move part of it onto a second line, like so:
(https://i.imgur.com/t1EnGMp.png)
- It looks like the beaming on m27/29 RH beats 3-4 got reset to how it was before Zeila's suggestion.
- I noticed that several of my note-related suggestions weren't addressed (e.g. m25, m32, m33/37). Would you be able to either incorporate these suggestions, or leave a comment on whether you hear differently/have some other reason to write it this way? It helps to ensure that feedback isn't accidentally overlooked.
All right, the formatting/visuals: this is where most of the work on the sheet will be taking place now. It's important to make sure that the dynamics, tempo directions, pedal markings, etc. are properly positioned so that the arrangement looks clean. One thing I notice is that a lot of your markings are colliding with each other or with notes, e.g. m3-4 dashed line, m20 pedal, m25 crescendo, m27 beams, m33 dynamic, etc. You'll want to make sure that nothing's colliding by adjusting the positioning of the markings and the space between staves and systems. The dashed lines associated with the tempo markings also aren't necessary (and not commonly used nowadays, to my knowledge), so you could remove those to save space if you wanted.
I'd suggest taking a look at the help guide
HERE (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?topic=11783.0) and the associated slideshow
HERE. (https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1erfTut-El1BzZUD5UOiPYHnGGsznw1mMqDCy5CVvmjE/edit?usp=sharing) Of note is how to properly position dynamics, tempo markings, and repeat ending numbers, as well as measure distribution (right now you have a single-measure system hanging at the end there). I know it's a lot—let me know if you have any questions about this, or if there are any specific points you want additional guidance on!
Hello,
Thank you again for these recommendations!
I have adjusted everything mentioned in your last message.
Regarding the ones you mentioned I didn't adjust, I mentioned in my reply, all of those are in the recording, not just to my hearing, but also as per the arranger who recorded the piece for the soundtrack (I corresponded with him extensively while transcribing this). This applies to the following points:
- I don't hear the G# on m25 RH beat 1.
- In m26, I think I hear the LH playing octaves on beats 1-3 (i.e. another E above the one you already have written).
- I don't really hear the chords in m26/28/30 being rolled like you've written them. If you want to keep them for effect, though, that's fine.
- m32 LH beat 1 should be an F instead of an A.
- In m33/38, I don't hear the upper octave in the RH on beats 2-3.
I have updated the document to move some things around as you suggested to avoid collisions.
Given the tempo alterations at the beginning, maybe I should remove the Rubato and A Tempo markings now?
I have uploaded the new files, Thank you!
Quote from: Alpacatron on August 19, 2021, 07:45:13 AMGiven the tempo alterations at the beginning, maybe I should remove the Rubato and A Tempo markings now?
I think these are fine.
All right, looking better. Some formatting/positioning aspects to give some more care to (and you can check the linked slides in presentation mode for visual examples):
- Dynamics should be centered with the noteheads on the beats they start, whenever possible. For example, in m1/13/18, the dynamics are currently too far to the left.
- The left edge of tempo directions should be aligned with the left edge of the noteheads on the beats they start, wherever possible. For example, in m3/5, your tempo directions stick out to the left past the left edge of the note and should be moved right a little. In m1/18, you don't need to worry about this because the dynamic is already in the way (the dynamic should be centered on beat 1 and the tempo marking can just be to the right of the dynamic).
- Measure distribution—right now you still have a single-measure system hanging at the very end of the score, which is undesirable. You could try changing the measure distribution to distribute the measures more evenly, or, alternative, shorten the last system so that it doesn't extend all the way across the width of the page.
- Collisions—you still have some collisions going on. For example, in m8, the crescendo collides with the sharp at the end of the measure. In m37, the dashed line of the rit. collides with the beams. You can alleviate these problems by increasing the white space between the LH and RH staves—in fact, this would be good to do for most or all of the systems in this sheet, because even when things aren't colliding, they often look cramped (m18, m25, m27, m32-39) especially when there are markings between the staves.
- Pedal marking positioning (m13-17)—this is tricky, but try to make sure that the positioning of your pedal changes relative to the noteheads are consistent. For example, on m13 beat 3 and m16 beat 1, the pedal change is way left of the notehead, but on m14 beat 3 and m15 beat 1, the pedal change is in the middle or on the right side of the notehead. (Additionally, the pedal markings in m15-16 get close to touching the stems; they could be moved down a bit.)
Feel free to let me know if you have questions!
Thank you again!
I have made these updates, and uploaded the new files :)
All right, looks really good! Just a few last comments from me before I approve:
- Small, but you could move the dynamic (and rubato) in m1 slightly more to the right. The p should be centered with the center of the notehead, but right now it's approximately centered with the stem.
- Listening again, I actually don't really hear a significant accel. in m3-4. I personally wouldn't keep it in the sheet, especially since it's ambiguous without a tempo marking at the end to indicate exactly how much it speeds up (but if you do keep it, I would move it up slightly since the dashed line gets pretty close to the flat in m3).
- Pedal markings in m15-17 could be moved slightly lower—the pedal change on m15 beat 3 is really uncomfortably close to touching the stem.
- It doesn't make sense for the rit. in m36 to extend through m37, since m36 and m37 belong to different endings. Did you mean for the rit. to only apply to m36?
- It sounds like the tempo is slower again at m18 (around q=68), and then faster again at m26 (around q=85). It's up to you how specifically you'd like to notate these—you could put specific tempo markings at each spot, or (since there quite a few of these changes, including the one at m9, and the piece is fairly free-flowing) you could be a bit more general with "Poco più mosso" / "Poco meno mosso" / "Più mosso", or you could do both—for example, "Poco meno mosso (q=68)"; "Più mosso (q=85)".
And that's it from me.
Thanks! I've made these changes, and am uploading the updated files now!
All right, looks good! For some reason the tempo wasn't working properly on playback (on my end at least), so I reset the MIDI playback and the tempo markings so that it works. I also moved the dynamic + a tempo in m18 and the rit. in m36 up slightly so that they weren't so close to the LH. I've updated the files in the OP—if you want to make further changes, you should download and edit those files.
I'll approve this one now for the next person to take a look, but one more thing you should consider—now that you've removed the a tempo in m5, it's ambiguous what the pianist should do in m5. The dashed line from the accel only extends to the end of m4; at m5, should the pianist go back to the original tempo or continue accelerating until m9? If the latter, then it would be clearer to remove the dashed line and write "poco a poco accel" in m3.
Done, and am uploading the new files now!
Thank you!
Sorry for the wait. Some cool reharmonisation in this.
-Use sharps or flats in bar 7, not a mixture of both. Since you got into sharps for bars 8+ I think it'd be better to use sharps. In other words, the Eb and Db in bar 7 should be D# and C#.
-What happens in bar 5 with the poco a poco accel? It's completely unclear in the sheet. To be honest, I'm not even sure I notice a deliberate accel in this section, at least not one that goes beyond just being loose with the tempo.
-You don't need an a tempo in bar 18, you have the new tempo marking for that.
-If you have two crotchets (quarters) that go across beat 3, you can just write them as a minim (half note). It will look a lot cleaner this way. Particularly in bar 12/23 where the overuse of ties makes the rhythm hard to discern, despite it being very simple. I strongly recommend this.
-The last three octaves in the right hand of bar 36 should be an octave lower.
-The first two left hand notes in bar 32 are F -> A, not A -> E. You can see how it matches the pattern in the left hand on beat 2.
-In bars 26-32, the only chords I hear rolled are the one in 31 and the first one in 32.
-The left hand chord in bar 14 should be rolled.
-The pedal marking in bar 20 feels like it comes off too early. Normally I don't think it's really necessary to write these markings in so explicitly, but since you are writing them in they should probably be accurate. It sounds like it comes off at the start of bar 21. But I would say that there is loads of pedal that is used in the piece that you haven't notated in, so I don't really see the point of being so explicit for only a few bars. I think it'd probably be better to just leave it up to the performer.
-The notes in the second half of bar 21 would probably look clearer written in two layers for the right hand rather than these mixed ties. Something like this:
Spoiler
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/492809359961882625/895724342116220928/unknown.png
I hope that helps. Let me know if you have any issues.
Thank you for the feedback, sorry it's taken me a while to get back to editing this.
Note that I had assistance with this from the artist who arranged and recorded this track.
I incorporated a lot of the changes you recommended, some that I did not:
-Bar 7 - The flats should stay as is, as they are immediately repeated from bar 6. The sharps are leading up to the new key.
-Quarters across beat 3 - This is a personal preference, as well as the original artist's preference, but I have changed most of them, with bars 19 and 23 being exceptions.
-Bars 14, 26-32 - This is what I hear, I've also confirmed the notation with the artist.
I'll upload the updated files, thank you again!
Quote from: Alpacatron on November 21, 2021, 05:01:15 PM-Bar 7 - The flats should stay as is, as they are immediately repeated from bar 6. The sharps are leading up to the new key.
I think you misunderstand me. At the moment you are spelling the first phrase as Eb -> Db -> Bn. This is a mixture of sharps and flats in the sense that it should really be spelt as either Eb -> Db -> Cb or (as I am suggesting) D# -> C# -> Bn. I think the second works better because it then segues more naturally in the second half of the bar. You have to swap from flats to sharps at some point and it makes the most sense to do it at the start of the bar, rather than partially in the middle of a phrase. You could also swap on beat 3 of bar 6 and write the Dbs and Ebs as C#s and D#s, I don't mind.
Quote from: Alpacatron on November 21, 2021, 05:01:15 PM-Bars 14, 26-32 - This is what I hear, I've also confirmed the notation with the artist.
I don't really mind about the rolls, but I'm not going to budge on the wrong notes in bar 32. I mistyped when I wrote up my previous post but the first two left hand notes of bar 32 are an F and a C, not an A and an E. Again, you can see that this makes sense since it matches up with the pattern played in the second half of the bar. I will only go off of the audio that you linked, which is where I am getting this from. This is what the sheet should match up to if it is to be hosted on the site.
More evidence if you want
I don't like linking these because it's a kind of silly way to arrange but here is the frequency spectrum at the start of bar 32 with clear peaks on Fs and nothing at A in the low end.
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/492809359961882625/912428828209586186/unknown.png
I can get another opinion if you really want me to but I think it is clearly unnecessary given the evidence above and the fact that I notice now that msf already pointed this mistake out to you.
You also didn't respond to or fix a bunch of other things that I pointed out. This process is only going to take longer if you don't communicate with me properly. This applies to the below points.
Quote from: Libera on October 07, 2021, 10:36:46 AM-The last three octaves in the right hand of bar 36 should be an octave lower.
-The pedal marking in bar 20 feels like it comes off too early. Normally I don't think it's really necessary to write these markings in so explicitly, but since you are writing them in they should probably be accurate. It sounds like it comes off at the start of bar 21. But I would say that there is loads of pedal that is used in the piece that you haven't notated in, so I don't really see the point of being so explicit for only a few bars. I think it'd probably be better to just leave it up to the performer.
-The notes in the second half of bar 21 would probably look clearer written in two layers for the right hand rather than these mixed ties. Something like this:
Spoiler
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/492809359961882625/895724342116220928/unknown.png
Also after looking at the some of the other feedback msf posted I noticed this
Quote from: mastersuperfan on August 16, 2021, 07:40:41 PM- I don't hear the G# on m25 RH beat 1.
This is correct. There is no G# in bar 25 until beat 2.5. I can show you another frequency spectrum if you really want, but the open fifth sound here is really clear.
Quote from: Alpacatron on November 21, 2021, 05:01:15 PMNote that I had assistance with this from the artist who arranged and recorded this track.
Try not to take this the wrong way, but I see that you're justifying a lot of things using this, and frankly from my point of view it doesn't really matter. All that matters is the source audio, which disagrees with a bunch of the things you have written in. I'm absolutely up for having a discussion, but having the response be 'I know the artist' every time is not very constructive.
I have changed the flats/sharps in bars 6/7.
I fixed the pedal markings in bar 20 previously.
Bar 21 I prefer as is, if it has to be changed though I'll change it.
I've removed the G# in bar 25.
I've changed the notes in bar 32.
I've also changed the rolls in bars 14, and 26-32.
Quote from: Alpacatron on November 22, 2021, 12:57:39 PMI fixed the pedal markings in bar 20 previously.
Sorry I didn't mean to leave that in the pile.
Quote from: Alpacatron on November 22, 2021, 12:57:39 PMI have changed the flats/sharps in bars 6/7.
This looks a lot better, great!
Everything else looks good as well now apart from bar 36. Those last three octave notes in the right hand should definitely be an octave lower, like they are in bar 40. The first one (the F#) is at the right height though.
I forgot about that one, I've changed it, and re-uploaded all the files again.
Cool. Everything looks good so I'll accept.
This submission has been accepted by Libera (https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=5291).
~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot