1
Submissions / Re: [NDS] Pokémon Diamond Version & Pokémon Pearl Version - "Lake" by Zeila
« on: November 03, 2022, 01:38:12 AM »
Alright, let's get down to it for this one! 
Sincere apologies for the wait.
My first request would be to use 3 measures per system throughout the A section as well. You have more than enough room to do so given half the third page is empty, and some places are awkwardly cramped like the LH of m. 13.
Other stuff from me:
- May I ask where the second eighth note in the lower layer in m. 6 comes from? Sounds like an A might fit better given the original. Same comment for the same place in m. 16, and 22.
- The exposed tritone in the left hand on beat 1 of m. 10 sounds a bit empty and dissonant compared to the intended lush harmony. I’d strongly suggest filling out the chord with a D between the notes, written in the second layer to preserve the separate melodic line. Perhaps an F below too - you lose the Bb at the bottom of the chord but I think the richness of the chord more than makes up for it. Same goes for m. 12.
- There are actually quite a few grace notes preceding strong beats in the melody in the A section, which are especially more prominent in the original starting in m. 18. Were these omitted intentionally? (If so, I’m fine with it to decrease complexity since we already have all these rolled chords and 16th lines)
- A crescendo would probably be nice in m. 24-25 (just cresc. Text in m. 24 to avoid the hairpin taking up too much space)
- The grace notes in m. 28 don’t make much sense to me with the on-beat chord re-striking the grace notes. Would a roll marking be better, or alternatively a single grace note G that’s tied to the half note G?
- m. 33 second half - the melody sounds like it should be Bn-A-G-Bn. Additionally, the Eb’s below the melody should be natural.
Sincere apologies for the wait.My first request would be to use 3 measures per system throughout the A section as well. You have more than enough room to do so given half the third page is empty, and some places are awkwardly cramped like the LH of m. 13.
-m26: Was there a specific reason you didn't keep this in 4/4 with 16ths, instead of 2/2 with 8ths? Both work if you prefer having it in 2/2, but since you haven't written the harp parts in 16ths (or 32nds in 4/4), there's not much against having it in 4/4 either.
I originally wrote out the fast harp part many years ago and worked off of that file, so I just kept it as 2/2. I think I'll leave it as is for now unless somebody feels strongly about using 4/4 instead
I don't know if I would describe my preference as "strongly" haha, it comes down to what you prefer instead ^^ If you didn't know yet, there's an option under Utilities -> Change to change the note durations, which will probably save some work.No strong opinion from me
Other stuff from me:
- May I ask where the second eighth note in the lower layer in m. 6 comes from? Sounds like an A might fit better given the original. Same comment for the same place in m. 16, and 22.
- The exposed tritone in the left hand on beat 1 of m. 10 sounds a bit empty and dissonant compared to the intended lush harmony. I’d strongly suggest filling out the chord with a D between the notes, written in the second layer to preserve the separate melodic line. Perhaps an F below too - you lose the Bb at the bottom of the chord but I think the richness of the chord more than makes up for it. Same goes for m. 12.
- There are actually quite a few grace notes preceding strong beats in the melody in the A section, which are especially more prominent in the original starting in m. 18. Were these omitted intentionally? (If so, I’m fine with it to decrease complexity since we already have all these rolled chords and 16th lines)
- A crescendo would probably be nice in m. 24-25 (just cresc. Text in m. 24 to avoid the hairpin taking up too much space)
- The grace notes in m. 28 don’t make much sense to me with the on-beat chord re-striking the grace notes. Would a roll marking be better, or alternatively a single grace note G that’s tied to the half note G?
- m. 33 second half - the melody sounds like it should be Bn-A-G-Bn. Additionally, the Eb’s below the melody should be natural.
I think everything else here went rather well, surprisingly given the style of the original track.