NinSheetMusic Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Libera

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 129
1
- Something I just noticed... the ppp at the beginning is small because the notes are small.

Oh damn I thought I'd already fixed this.  Nice spot.

- Thoughts about flipping the tie in m. 25/57/99 so it points downward away from the note above?

Yeah I agree this looks better.  Although something was really off with those ties, I had to delete the notes and reinput the ties because if I tried to flip them before they went really wrong for some reason.

- The bass in the original at the beginning of m. 28 plays E instead of G#
- I don't really hear the B re-struck in the chord in m. 29
- The last bass note in m. 44 sounds like D# instead of E
- The last couple of bass notes in m. 46 sound an octave down from where they are now. Did you raise them?
- Overlapping notes on beat 1 of 85/89 I assume are not intentional?
- The chord in m. 106 - I hear C on top here. So bottom to top, A-E-F-G-C. (Man, I love these chords at the end.)

All these should be fixed now.  Thanks!

- The beginning of m. 32 RH sounds like it should be G#-C# just like the other places to me

Hmm I definitely hear the major second interval with the B below, but I've added back in the G# as well.

- I think there's a B missing in the bass of m. 45 (after the D# with the grace notes)

I agree that a note is missing but it sounds like a C# to me.

- The second to last bass note in m. 73 sounds like A instead of D

I can hear both now so I'm not really sure.  Maybe some other part is confusing me...

New files are up.  Thanks for having another look!

2
Thanks! Yeah a lot of good stuff here, I really appreciate the careful look. Lots of details to iron out.

No worries!

Since you mentioned it a while back I've come to appreciate the importance of reiterating this melody when listening every now and then. I really like your suggestion which is much better than crushing the melody between the two voices on the lower staff - the melody sounds good up there and the piano chords sound find inverted. Definitely like how it resolves to the upper D in the chord in m. 6, too. I've written it as you have (keeping the offbeat D's in the left hand) and also split m. 6 RH into two layers. :D

Great!  I'm glad I could help with that section.

I'll reply inline for the rest of these since most of them are rather small and to keep the size of this post down...

Yep all these changes look good to me.  Just one thing:

For bar 44 would it not make more sense to have the A in the right hand and the G in the left hand?  That way the hands don't overlap and beat 2 of the RH matches beats 3 and 4.

After that I'll approve.

4
Files updated.  Thanks for the help guys.

Ah, you want the G# re-struck I presume? Maybe writing a rest in the melody instead of tying over the note would help make it look less ambiguous.

We talked about this over discord and seemed to come to a solution.

  • m19/23 LH should look like m51/55 - the D#-E in the middle should be an octave lower.
  • m38 LH sounds like it drops an octave after the last note (same rhythm as m39).
  • m44 LH is missing a note in the 2nd half of the measure (should be 16th rest-16th-8th-8th).
  • m45 RH: Why not just flip the tie? I know it would go through the 2nd layer but it looks a lot less weird. The way you have it looks more like a slur than a tie.
  • m48 LH beat 6 (the second half of that 8th note) should be another 16th note (C# below the staff).
  • m57 LH should have another 8th note at the end (C# below the staff) instead of just a quarter note.
  • m62 LH: The dotted quarter sounds like it should be a chord too like m58-61.
  • You might want to double-check m72 LH; I'm hearing something completely different.
  • The quarter note in m97 RH Layer 2 could be moved to the left just a bit so it lines up with the Layer 1 and the LH more.

All of this should be fixed now!  Thanks for the help.

  • The dyads in m26-27 and 30-31 RH sound like they should have both G# and F# (i.e. just the top note changes between C# and B)

I'm not a huge fan of this for two reasons.  1. I don't hear the F# on beat 1 of those bars, and 2. I want to emphasise the choir/voices coming in on beat 2 of these bars with the change of harmony.

  • m43 LH sounds like it should have two 16ths at the start instead of an 8th.

I didn't change this one either.  For one, it's not super clear to me whether that's actually a double tap or just the sound of the strings being released (if you listen to other bars sometimes you can hear something similar) but also I think it's best just to keep it consistent with the other bars for ease of reading and playing.

5
Submissions / Re: [NES] Final Fantasy III - "Battle 2" by Yug Guy
« on: April 17, 2021, 06:47:07 PM »
Just a little bump.

6
Nice piece, nice arrangement.  There's a fair bit of feedback below but it's all mostly just details. 

The voice in m. 5 that parallels the one in m. 1 - I didn't have any good ideas for incorporating it (and honestly didn't even notice it at first - the few voices I've written in sound more prominent to me) but let me know if anyone else does.

So yeah, bar 5.  I really think that the melody should be included here (because that's what this omitted voice is).  While the piano may be higher in mix (perhaps in volume and pitch) it's just four repeated chords that are serving to accompany the repeat of the melodic line from bar 2.  I also think that by omitting this melody the resolution into bar 6 is greatly diminished (we get a static line that goes chord -> exactly the same chord as opposed to the melody which soars up to the top D).

But you asked for a solution, not for philosophy, so I spent a while coming up with one.  This is my suggestion:
Spoiler
[close]
You could also drop either the D or E in those second layer chords if you think it sounds too dense, but I actually think this sounds great, personally.  You still get the effect of those repeated chords whilst keeping the melody and the resolution into bar 6.  You might also want to rewrite the offbeat Ds into layer 2 in the right hand, but maybe the finger substitution would be fun?  Either way is fine really.

Anyway... other stuff:

-This isn't super important but I think the tempo marking would look better if it was positioned normally horizontally but higher up so it's above the 8va.
-Any reason for a cresc. rather than a hairpin in bar 5?  I think hairpins are generally clearer so you should use them when possible.
-You could put in another high A for bar 4 if you wanted.  I don't mind really.
-I'm not actually sure I hear the left hand D on beat 4.5 of bar 5 (although this point doesn't matter at all if you take my suggestion above...)
-I think there's a lower E on beat 4.5 of bar 6 in the left hand.
-In addition to my previous point about the resolution into bar 6, I think the chord sounds kind of off to me.  I think it's because it's missing a G from the strings in the original, so maybe consider adding that in.
-The chord in bar 7 is actually completely measured, so I don't think it needs a fermata on it.
-The pair of triplets in 28 should be a sextuplet (with the beam still broken in the middle like it is here), right?  That was my understanding of the correct notation here, because we're in 4/4.
-I think the little guy at the end of 29 is actually demi triplets, like this:
Spoiler
[close]
Although honestly I think you could get away with graces here, but your choice.
-There's an extra A in the trumpet solo in bar 30, like this:
Spoiler
[close]
Honestly this trumpet solo is so great it made me go and get my trumpet and butcher it horribly; good stuff.  I should really practice more haha.
-Rolls on the notes in bar 34?
-It feels weird to me to start with the guitar on beat 2 of bar 42 and then drop to the piano on beat 3.  I think it'd make more sense to play the A -> B from the guitar on beat 3 and then continue with the piano on beat 3.5.  At least, I think that's the most natural way to hear the combination of those two lines.  You could even put the E below if you really think it's important.
-Sounds more like an A at the top of the chord in bar 43 beat 1 to me, in the guitar and piano.
-I think the piano plays both a G and an A on beat 2 of bar 44, so, while it's not really wrong what you're written, I think it might make more sense to have the A instead so that those sets of four all match each other.
-There's also some additional harmony that you could include if you wanted to in the run in 44, but I actually think sticking to the single run is better like you have it.
-I think there's an E on beat 2.5 of bar 11 (LH) like in 19.
-Bring off the left hand D on beat 3 of bar 12 like in 15?
-I hear another left hand B on beat 2.5 of bar 14.  Same for bar 22.  Same for 40 I think?  Not as sure for this one.
-None of the extra harmony on beat 4 of bar 15?
-In comparison to the previous point, I think that the chord you've written in for beat 3 of bar 16 is rather more heavy than it is in original, which is more of a light resolution.  Does it really need to double the tonic and the fifth?
-Missing a C on beat 3.5 of bar 23?  Could be in the left or the right hand.
-I think it'd be nice to include the whole of the arpeggio in bar 24, finishing on beat 3.  Any reason that you didn't?
-There's something kind of funny about the bass going on in 25-33 with regards to octaves but I think what you have keeps everything consistent so I'm just going to leave it.
-The third note of the right hand in bar 32 should be a D I think (which matches the rest of the ascending pattern as well).
-The chord in bar 32 is missing an A I think, but it might be kind of awkward to play so maybe you want to leave it out.  I don't mind.
-You could write the A in for the piano part in beat 2.75 of bar 35 like you did for bar 38.  Same for 39.
-I think you should put the B -> C semiquavers at the end of bar 38 down the octave.  I think here there's really no way to not confuse this for the melody and they're actually resolving up to the D which is now an octave below.

7
Submissions / Re: [GBA] Mega Man Zero 4 - "Power Field" by Jake_Luigi
« on: April 14, 2021, 09:48:10 PM »
Cool piece.  Regarding the sheet, I think this one needs a bit more love and care than it currently has.  I don't know if this was an ambitious arrangement for you, but I think it needs a fair amount of more work before it can be accepted.  I've got a lot of feedback below, some of it regarding wrong notes and others regarding the general arrangement strategy.  I've also included formatting feedback, though I'm unsure of your ability to carry out these formatting changes.  Try to address the feedback as best you can and let me know if there's anything you need more help with or cannot do yourself.

This is unlikely to be my last round of feedback as much of it will depend on how you address the comments below.



Formatting:

-No bar numbers.  Forgive me if any of my bar numberings are off at all as I was doing them in my head.
-Composer and arranger info are too close together.
-Direction and tempo marking are overlapping, would be better in a single expression.
-Copyright/url is misaligned and the font is the wrong size (should be size 12).
-Title and game title are misaligned.
-Margins are very uneven and the systems aren't aligned to the left margin.  I recommend 0.5 for the top right and bottom margins.
-No page numbers or mini titles on subsequent pages.
-Staff separation is oddly set to 0.88", I recommend 1".
-I recommend not using a page resize and instead resizing the staff size to 0.65cm.

Arrangement comments:

-Should be in Gm (two flats).  You can tell because G is the tonal centre of the piece.
-Highly recommend dropping the left hand piano notes in 26/28/30/32.  I don't think they really fit very well, especially in the first three bars where the guitar solo is taking centre stage.  They also don't really follow the drum patterns at all and so I think they're out of place.  I'd suggest dropping it completely in the first three bars and writing in the drum fill in bar 32 with x noteheads.  Like in this picture:
Spoiler
[close]
-For some reason a lot of the accidentals don't seem to be appearing in the sheet.  They play back correctly so I'm not sure what's wrong.  Try deleting the notes and adding them back in.
-It's not really clear where the melody is in bars 9-32 with the chords written in the same layer and at the same height.  You could try moving the chords lower when they play on their own, or writing them in a separate layer.
-I'm not sure the way you're written out the final section (33+) is really the best way to go about it.  This way you lose out the addition of the high guitar part in 37+ and it kind of just sounds the same throughout the whole eight bars.  Something you could try is keeping the bass in the left hand but incorporating the guitar hits around the string line in the right hand.  (If you were to keep it as is, then it would be better to add in the octaves at 37 rather than at 35.)
-The sheet could benefit from a lot more ornaments in the right hand for the guitar bends.  It sounds a bit flat without them.
-There are no articulations in the entire sheet.  You don't have to go overboard on them, but surely the sheet could benefit from at least a few in places.
-Similarly you could also add in more dynamics, but admittedly there isn't that much dynamic contrast in the original so I don't mind if you want to leave them out.

Right hand:

-I don't hear the lower notes in the first three beats of bar 3 (or bar 7).  They sound very odd to me.
-The rhythm in bar 4 should match up with the left hand (i.e. the chord should come in on beat 1.5).
-I hear power chords (tonic and fifth) for the chords in 4 and 8 (plus the final chord in 3 and 7) rather than triads.  In other words, I think you should get rid of the thirds (the Gs and the As).  You can always double the tonic to get some more force if you want.
-Bar 25 beat 3.5 the C and the next four notes should all be a step lower.  Same for bar 29.
-Bar 28 beat 1.5 the C should be a G (bended up to from an F).
-The string line in 33+ should look like this:
Spoiler
[close]

Left hand:
-Bar 1 beat 4 should be a G.
-Bar 5 beat 3.5 should be a Bb.
-Bar 5 beat 4 should be a C.
-Bar 8 beat 4 and 4.5 should be F and F#.
-Bar 9 beat 4 should be a G.  Same for bar 13.
-Bar 11 beat 4 should be a G.  Same for bar 15.
-Bar 12 the first three notes should be Bb G F.
-Bar 16 there should be an F# on beat 4.5.
-All the same note changes for 17-24, although the bass does go up to a C on beat 4.5 of 24 rather than an F#.  You could use a repeat with a first and second time if you wanted to here, which may save you a page on the whole sheet.
-Other than that last note, I think 16 and 24 should be consistent.
-The left hand should be beamed like in bar 34 for the whole of 33+.

8
Cool and no problem.  I've uploaded the new files (let me know if you find any issues with them) and I'll accept!

9
Thanks for having a look.  I've uploaded some new files, but bear in mind that there are a lot of changes I haven't made yet while I think about them some more.

- There's an extra D# on beat 1 of m. 19, 23, 51 and 55 in layer 1 that shouldn't be there
- m. 50 beat 6 ("just") is missing, should be C#
- m. 90 beat 6 ("when") should be E instead of G
- m. 91 beat 6 ("and") is missing, should be G
- Spacing is off at the beginning of m. 9
- The rest is rather close to the first chord in m. 40
- Slur on grace note in m. 71 LH looks like it was accidentally hidden

These are all fixed (or should be fixed).  Very nice spot on the D#s in 19 etc.  I think they're holdovers from when I wrote that section out in one layer and then accidentally didn't revert.

- Could we change keys to Dm at 66 instead of 75? Measure 66 is a D chord and this section finds itself fully transitioned to Dm before it's over - 70+ fits perfectly in D minor and would avoid a lot of accidentals (some of which are currently causing placement issues between the two layers).

Although initially unsure, I'm inclined to agree with you here.  I originally didn't like writing a section that started on D9 in Dm and it didn't feel worthwhile adding a separate key change for this section, but on a second look I think it makes more sense this way.  Although I have now put the key change at 58 rather than 66 (if you look at the chords in 58-66 it's pretty much the exact same thing).

- Third-to-last LH note in m. 19/23 sound like F# rather than E.

I just had another few listens.  I'm pretty sure it goes to an E in 19 (although I can hear an F# somewhere).  In 23 I'm less certain (I can hear different things based on the octave) and I think again it may just be confused by an F# in a different part (louder in 23).  I've left this as is for now but I'm happy to have another look at it later.

- Thoughts about not writing in the D# in m. 10 beat 3 RH? When playing it could easily be mistaken for a melody note.

Currently unsure.  I think you still have potential for confusion even if we drop the D# (one might think the melody drops down to a B on beat 3) and we lose some harmony this way.  I could move the D# down an octave but I think that is a bit too muddy of a sound.  My normal course here is to not lie/confuse the reader so that they have the information that they need to get the correct voicings across to the listener, which is what I've done here.

There are a couple of places where the melody overlaps a notehead in the lower layer, and there's an augmentation dot that's only supposed to apply to the lower layer. I think m. 11 is okay but 45 looks a bit odd. Maybe remove the G# from layer 2 and separate the two layers horizontally slightly to keep the G# melody quarter note more conspicuous.
Spoiler
[close]

This is a good point and I now see the issue.  I don't think the way I currently have it written conveys exactly what I want it to, and although yours is clearer, it doesn't really follow what I wanted either.  I'll give this another think and sacrifices may have to be made.

- The second 16th note in the right hand of m. 21/53 - I've never heard that when listening casually to the original and I think if it is there it's much quieter than the rest of the voice. It also distracts from the melody (makes it sound like it's ascending from the E) and makes the figure a bit more awkward to play. I think it would be best to not write it in.
  - I'm inclined to say the same thing about the end section as well, but I see 87/95 are taken from the violins instead. I guess I hear the E in 91 but not so much the F in 99 - though stylistically I think it still makes sense to omit them to emphasize the melody more.
  - Similar comment about m. 25 and 57.

These are basically all the same comment.  At the moment I'm not really in favour of getting rid of these notes because 1) This is how I've always heard it, although admittedly its difficult for me to go back to being a 'casual listener' after having listened to this piece so many times; and 2) I think this way the phrases have more energy, even if they are a little harder to play.  That said, I'll think about this some more.  (Note: the F in 87 comes from the strings.)



Sorry that this response is a bit unfinished (things I'm still thinking about), but you're not done checking the sheet yet so I think it's fine.

10
Generally the notes and arrangement are pretty good, but I think the formatting could still be improved.  Whilst I recognise the effort gone to so that this could fit onto one page, I think the end result looks very cramped, especially at the top and the bottom of the page.  Here is my recommended layout:
Spoiler
[close]
Things I did:
-Moved to a two page layout.
-Increased the staff separation.
-Realigned the title and url/copyright.
-Moved the systems to start on the left margin (for some reason they didn't..?).

You will (potentially) also notice two other changes in that picture.

-Bar 9's RH should look like this (everything comes in a semiquaver earlier and there is an extra penultimate B):
Spoiler
[close]

-Bar 11's left hand is different, let me explain.  I don't think the way that the top voice jumps down from the E by a ninth works very well, particularly as this then causes it to cross over with the lower voice.  I agree that this is what happens in the original, but a) I don't think it works very well on piano; b) you have already put the E up to the octave on beat 3, so it's weird for it to not descend by a second; and c) the voicings are completely confused to the reader by writing it this way.  (Furthermore, the Dn and D# on beat 3.5 shouldn't really be written in this way and should instead use a double/split stem.)  Here's a picture:
Spoiler
[close]
The first picture denotes what you currently have with the correct notation for beat 3.5 (this is just for educational purposes, I don't recommend writing the bar this way).  The second picture is my recommendation if you REALLY want to keep it the way you have it (writing it in two layers means it is easier to discern the voicings).  The third picture is my actual recommendation: put the whole of those last four notes up the octave (not just the E) and put a courtesy natural on the Dn.  I highly recommend the third picture since it is clearer to read, much less awkward to play and reflects the original well.

If you're alright with the above changes (see my first picture), I have the files ready to upload.

11
This one is really quite frenetic isn't it.  Nice sheet, looks very accurate.  Most of my concerns are about accidentals, which you'll probably not be surprised by.

-Bars 2-3 (6-7) are basically just riffing on a D7 chord, (4-5 and 8 are the same but for an Eb7 chord) so I think the accidentals should reflect that.  In other words, I'd recommend changing the Gbs to F#s and the Abb to a Gn in 2-3/6-7 and changing C#s to Dbs in 4-5/8 (left hand as well!).  Here's a picture with bar 2 changed:
Spoiler
[close]
-Honestly trying to hear what the weird synth is doing in 4-5 is pretty difficult for me, but your notes sound a bit out of place/off to me.  Here's a picture with the best that I can make out for it (the repeated notes aren't really necessary at the end but they're what I can hear):
Spoiler
[close]
-Speaking of repeated notes, the repeated double tap left hand notes in 10-12 are really killer on the left hand.  Might you consider making it a little easier by changing it to something like this?
Spoiler
[close]
I think it'd be a lot easier to pull off and it sounds pretty much identical.
-The chord in 9 is an F#7 (without the fifth) so I think the Bbs should be A#s.
-The first chord change in 13 is Eb7 -> Ab (a V-> I kind of deal) and so I think the G# chord should be written as Ab, despite it going on to resolve up to A7.
-Again, it's really hard to hear the weird synth line in 10-11, but I'm getting something closer to this:
Spoiler
[close]
-OK, key signature.  My gut instinct is two sharps (D major) because the loop has this A -> D(7) thing.  However, I think that maybe one sharp (G major) could also work, what with all of the D7 chords and the fact that it does actually go to G for bars 10-11.  I don't really see how 1 flat works since the piece doesn't really spend any time with Dm or F chords.

12
Cool piece, generally looks great.  Some small things:

-I think it might make more sense to write the metric modulation in quavers instead since 6/8 doesn't relate so well to them.
-I'd recommend either changing the C#s and Bn to Db and Cb OR the Fn to an E# in the final bar, since that way it would be spelt like a 7 chord like the rest are.  The other possibility is to view this final chord a little differently and think of it like G7flat5 without the G, and then spell it Db F Bn.  An argument in favour of this would be that it's functioning as a dominant for the loop back to Cm.  Something to think about anyway.
-Dots + staccatos make me sad, did you consider writing them as normal quavers with semiquaver rests?
-I can see the reasoning for writing it the way you have it, but you might want to also consider writing the RH in 19-23 to prioritise the cool double chromatic descension thing that's going on, rather than mirroring the bass.  Just another thought.

13
someone [undisclosed] requested that I submit this

Hmmm... I guess they must have been some sort of big fan of Yoshi or something.

14
You were and continue to be an inspiration in arranging.  Even in the years before I joined you were my favourite arranger on the site and I hope you can continue to make arrangements in the future, even if it's at a reduced pace.

Congratulations on seven years, friend!

Spoiler
I spent ages looking for a hidden url link on your post haha.
[close]

15
That's the soundtrack for the anime adaptation and movie, this is the one for the visual novel.

Thanks, I hate it.

The other things have been adjusted

Cool.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 129

Page created in 0.421 seconds with 23 queries.