Messages

its very pretty

[accepting]

That all works for me! accepting shortly...

I can't figure out what you're talking about with the C3 on beat 2.5

It sounds quite faint, but not less faint than certain notes included elsewhere. Leaving it out works for me too
Sure

If moved cross-staff, that Bb causes a lot of visual clutter with the B naturals on beat 4

It looks okay to me at least (see attachment) and has the added benefit of showing it should be played by the RH, but again up to you

Playing an A3 on beat 1 is impossible, and lowering it to an A2 muddies the rest of the base contour significantly. And I don't hear any new strikes on beat 4.5

Sorry, I meant beat 3. Think I still hear 4.5 as well but it is rather faint.

Let me know your final thoughts on these and then I can accept!

Here goes nothing...

• m1 beat 1: The Ab sounds an octave lower, the En an octave higher
• m2: The LH Ab sounds like a Bb
• m3-4: I think this can be easily played if distributed between hands, no need to make these notes optional
• m5-6: I think the line starting on beat 3 in the LH can be kept to its original pitches
• m7: The 'optional' C can be left out imo, there are 2 Cs in the LH that make up for it in sound
• m8: same comment as m5-6
• Was the pizz. strings harmony omitted intentionally? I think it could make a nice addition, especially in the second measures of the pattern, where the RH doesnt have as much to do
• m13-14: You could include the full harmony in the lower RH layer
• m15-19: See previous
• m26: beat 3.5 RH sounds like an eighth note
• m28: I think including the 2nd on beat 4 would add more character, in the original its quite distinct as well
• m37: beat 3.5 I hear E5
• m37: The key sig is a little close to the barline, could it be moved slightly left? The DS should be right-aligned to the barline as well

[accept]

Looks good to me! Time to accept... _{(is this the first G-Han sheet not on the Audit??)}

That all works for me, has been updated!

[Notes:]

Notes:

• m6: Not hearing the Eb at beat 1 RH
• m7: Hearing C4 instead of G at LH beat 1, and a C3 at beat 2.5
• m9 & 13: The B at beat 1 in the RH sounds an octave lower
• m10 & 14: The Bb at beat 1 in the RH sounds an octave lower
• m11: I think I hear D4 at beat 1?
• m15: I hear Bb3 and D4 instead of F4 at beat 1
• m18: The high LH Bb could be cross-staved? The beam can stay below the staff as to not add extra clutter
• m18: Beat 4 in the RH should have a D instead of F
• m23: I hear additional A3s at beat 3 and possibly 4.5

Presentation

• m2: Thoughts on making the RH lower layer part of the LH? I think it's most comfortable to play that way and also visually looks better. You could start using the treble clef in m1 as well
• m7: The tuplet number in the LH seems too high up (in the PDF at least)
• m5, 9, && 11: Very nitpicky but these markings could be more appropriately centered between staves. The text expressions can also start slightly before the notes

Just a few tiny things left, but everything else looks good!
-In m16, maybe you could add some text saying L.H. for the bottom voice in the R.H. at beat 3, just to make sure it's clear the L.H. should take this?

Now that the rests are hidden I think it should be clear

- About the presentation of m. 3...

I opted for something else entirely

- m. 20 - I don't hear the second C in the triplet at all, just sounds like a single strike of the C?
- m. 24 - this first triplet doesn't sound like a triplet, more like an echoey effect...?

I still hear these and think they are worth including

- The rest in the 6/4 measure sounds like it actually lasts a whole eighth rest longer... not imagining this am I? Do you think it might also be helpful to break m. 20-21 into some smaller measures?

I changed the distribution to hopefully make more sense?? Also you're right about that one measure being longer, I added fermatas like I did to other measures that were also longer

Thank you both for the feedback, files updated~

Has all been taken care of, thanks both!

All your assumptions are correct! Files have been updated

[approve]

All of these decisions sound good to me! Fixing the stem overlapping already makes everything look less cramped so leaving the spacing is fine in my books. Happy to approve this!

• m12: The D in the RH doesn't sound staccato
• m13-15: Maybe you could make beats 1.5 and 3 of the RH staccato here?
• m1 and m3: If you want you could add the glockenspiel part in the RH
• m21: I hear the notes in this measure shorter than you have written them, was this a stylistic decision?

- I'd suggest sustaining notes (the G) over the rest of m. 5-6 LH instead of having rests

Hmm, the intent here was to show that the LH figure continues into the RH but I agree the rests are not ideal. Changed for now, but if there's a way of showing that it would be nice to incorporate that too

- Somewhat related to the above, I think m. 7 sounds to me more like this:

Phrasing wise I agree, but I don't hear that new high A

- m. 15: I was also thinking this miiight be better as some kind of tuplet instead of straight eighths since the timing is kinda loose, but I'm not sure. Thoughts?

I think it's fine as is, in combination with the performance direction at the start of the sheet.

Thank you for checking!

-m6: I hear a Bb and F in the piano on beat 3 (so stacking two more fifths on the current Ab-Eb). You can add the Bb in the L.H. and the F in the R.H.

I'm only hearing the F

-m20: An alternative way of distributing the piano and woodwind voices is putting the C-C-F in a second layer in the R.H., and the An-En in the L.H. I don't really have an argument for or against either (except maybe keeping the voices in separate hands), but it feels satisfying to play that way haha. Also, maybe you could write the first C in the triplet as a staccato 8th instead of 16th + 16h rest?

I like this because the Bb tie looks neater Not adding staccato to accent the triplet quality better

-m21: I feel like the piano + bassoon part take up more of the forefront melody rather than the high piccolos/flutes, maybe you could use those as the melody instead? (bassoon an octave higher than the original)

I went for a bit of both

-m23: The Eb-Bb-F fifth stack is a bit stretchy for me to play with the L.H., maybe you could put the F in the R.H. instead?

Since it occurs in other places where the RH can't play it, I'd rather keep it consistently written and leave it up to the performer to decide

thanks for reviewing!