Interested in contributing to the site? Give The Arrangement Formatting Guidelines and The Arranging Checklist a good read!
If you happen to know how to flip the part of the tie which crosses over into the next measure, please tell me (e.g. measure 17).Under the Special Tools menu, there's a Tie Tool. Using that, you can click on the measure and right click the specific tie, click Edit, and change the tie direction.
not much to add here.- RH notes in m8 should occur earlier in the measure.oops lol
- Roll the octave at the end of m16/42/66 RH?Yep, got these
- For m26 and m76 LH, it might look cleaner to have all the rests at the same height instead of having two rests at each height.
- Dynamic in m27 is a bit low.
- Also include the cello notes in the LH at the end of m29, like in m27?
- For m12 and all similar measures, I don't think I hear a chord change during the measure (i.e. I would keep the F instead of moving it down to Eb).I had that written originally and then second-guessed myself a few times when playing through it since I thought the sound of the Csus chord below the Eb melody sounded a bit off. There's an Eb in the bass that begins the figure continued on beats 3.5-4.5, so my justification for resolving the F>Eb in the chord is that Eb in the bass raised up an octave.
- I'm not sure if the second half of m26/76 really sounds like a seventh chord to me. If I listen super carefully I can maybe hear an F, but I dunno. You might consider changing the F on beat 3.5 to a G, which sounds better IMO.Sounds good to me!
- I feel like there could be some way to optimize this so that you didn't have to write out the same section three times... Maybe something like a repeated section with three endings could get this to fit on three pages, but that might be a bit more confusing to follow. I guess it's also probably fine as is.Yeah, m. 9-24, 35-50, and 59-74 are almost the same - their ending measures are different, and the last iteration has a rit. in it towards the end. But the things that really throw a wrench in it are:
In addition - Blue can always make the lower notes small if it's decided to leave it up to the player.I would prefer if we didn't do this, since that would make the lower notes harder to read. Just playing the top notes is as easy (to read) a simplification there can be, and we can clarify in a performance note if we don't think it's clear enough
Also changed the C in m29b1 to a Bb because I now hear the transition of the Ab from the previous measure to that,You can keep the C too there if you want (I think I would), it's there in the original and the chord sounds pretty empty otherwise (just root + fifth).
I hear the F for m32 b3, are you sure that's the right measure?Yeah, pretty sure. Maybe the F is there too, it fits harmonically, but the Dn sticks out to me in the original. (To be clear it's the Dn just above middle C)
Changed m34. I still hear an 8th on b2.5, but i moved it to the F which is where I now hear it. Also added an F on top of the Eb on b1.Ah yeah, that's good.
- Last note of m. 4 should be a Bb.
That’s fine. Sorry we couldn’t reach an understanding.That's okay. Thanks for the discussion today and closing this one out peacefully. Hopefully we can see eye to eye on other submissions in the future.
<snip>Sorry Levi - not to discount your comments, but unfortunately, I'm going to have to put on my moderator hat and archive this thread now at the wishes of Slow and the staff. I don't think anyone will benefit from further discussion in this topic today.
The thing is, the reasons you’re giving are the same as outright banning arrangements beginning in seven accidental keys—none will ever be accepted if you guys continue upholding these musically conservative opinions. Maybe you’re okay with that, but as I said with all due respect, I think it’s a disgrace.I don't have anything to add about this other than what Static just posted. I still think you're misinterpreting our collective stance somehow.
You guys have really surprised and depressed me here. Sorry to Levi, who said I’ve been posting “attacks” on the moderators,I'm sorry you feel that way. Despite what Levi said, I think this conversation has been civil from both sides...
but if you go back and read all my posts I’m literally just respectfully disagreeing....on the flip side of the coin, so is everyone else. Your opinions are valid, but there's something to be said when everyone else who's commented here disagrees with them.
Honestly, I’m fine if you don’t accept it, this is giving me a lot of anxiety and headache. I made the arrangement, it’s done, maybe I can find a spot for it at some point. I can officially withdraw my submission if that would be easier for everyone.I think we have reached am impasse, so that would probably be best for everyone.
Then don’t accept it. I just don’t really think it’s appropriate that you won’t despite the fact that someone approved it and I’m not breaking any rules (and like I said, I think adding a rule about using simpler key signatures, which you’re basically enforcing here, would be a disgrace).To be clear, I did not say that I would refuse to accept this without a keysig change - I haven't decided that for myself personally, although I know for a fact that others would object to it. I am not advocating for a rule about key signatures here.
As a user of this site long ago, seeing this arrangement would have really intrigued me and gotten me excited, and I know there are others like me out there....and a key signature like this can be an unnecessary roadblock.
