NinSheetMusic Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Are you on Discord? Join our server!

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 ... 75
I might agree if it was something more obscure/weird, but I think this song fits nicely into 9/8. Also, 9/8 subdivided into 4 unequal pulses is decently common as far as odd times go. I see no need to do an additive time sig here, especially since other time sigs have been notated on-site the way I did it.  If it's really that big of an issue I suppose we could change it, but it looks fine to me as is.

Turns out I guess this is just something I haven't really seen before, feel free to keep it as is.

I only found one instance of the first thing you said about 9/8 grouping (measure 7), but it has been fixed. As for the 4/4 stuff, if you're talking about measures 18, 21 and 26, those were all edits by Levi. I originally had them notated as dotted, but he changed them to multiple tied notes. I'm honestly not sure which is more correct, so I'll just leave them as they are for now.

I think in this case it's more correct to have it as dotted crotchet quaver.  That way the groupings match between the left hand and right hand.  (Groups of four quavers with groups of four quavers.)  For the ones in bar 21, 42 and 44 I think it's more subjective, although personally I would write them as dotted minims over crotchet tied to minim.  Also, you still have some incorrect beaming in bar 8: it should be written as dotted crotchet tied to quaver rather than a minim.

Everything else looks good to me, I think.

Submissions / Re: [MUL] Rome: Total War - "Divinitus" by hamishbrown
« on: July 17, 2019, 11:04:06 PM »
I'm not sure if I'm going completely insane, but in finale notepad, whenever I try to move the pedal markings so that they look nice and uniform, they back into a poor position whenever I scroll. How am I supposed to place them somewhere and make sure they don't move? Can anyone help?

You're not; it's a stupid bug finale has with articulations sometimes.  I've only encountered it before with brackets, but I guess it can happen to pedal markings too.  I use the smartshape pedal markings rather than the articulation ones which avoids this issue entirely, so I edited your sheet to remove the articulation markings and replace them with the smartshape ones; it should be good now.  (Just use the link I gave you before, I've updated it to this file.)  Once the pedal markings are updated, I'll give this my approval I think.

Perhaps it should say "arranged by hamishbrown and libera?"

Totally up to you, really.  Updaters don't tend to put their names on sheets after editing them because we do it so often, but I admit that I probably did a bit more editing here than I usually do.  So yeah, up to you, feel free to keep credit to yourself if you want as I won't mind.

Hey, congratulations, Libera! You've done incredible things in just one year, and I think you ought to be very proud.

Thanks for all of the great sheets and help you've brought to this site! May we have you here for many more years to come!

Thanks, Levi!  I hope I'm around for a while as well! :)

At first I was confused as to why no one had done this yet, but once I mapped it out as 116 bars I got the general idea as to the reason.

Gaur Plain: [Musx] [Pdf] [Midi] [Mus]

Submissions / Re: [MUL] Rome: Total War - "Divinitus" by hamishbrown
« on: July 17, 2019, 12:04:25 AM »
I remember playing this game many, many years ago.  I had forgotten the soundtrack though entirely, so thanks for reminding me of it!  Generally speaking I think the sheet's pretty good but there are a few comments I have:

-Firstly, I think the left hand accompaniment could do with some extra uniformity.  The way you've written at the moment has some sudden double/triple notes which I'm not wholly convinced are in the original, and even if they are I think the sheet would be better served with uniform, arpeggio-like accompaniment patterns.  You also have some missing/incorrect left hand notes in places (like bar 7, 9, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 21).  I think perhaps some of the chords/dyads you have written in may be the result of hearing left-over notes from previously in the bar as well, perhaps?
-Secondly, I think that the harmony line in the vocals should be inverted below the melody line.  In the recording, they mix the harmony line much lower than the melody line which means the melody comes out very clearly, but on piano we don't really have that privilege; my solution is to bring the harmonies below the melody as our ears tend to hear the top notes as the most prominent when everything is at the same volume.  I really, really strongly suggest this as at the moment you're losing the correct impact at the eponymous 'Divinitus' in bar 21 which is a real shame in my view.

After those two comments, there are some other various minor suggestions:

-You're missing the a Db semiquaver on beat 3.75 in bar 6 in the vocal line.
-The harmony line in bar 12 should have an Fn on beat 4.75.
-The dotted rests in bars 5, 17 and 20 (and any that I missed) should be rewritten as quaver + semiquaver rests.  (We generally reserve dotted rests for compound time signatures or if the sheet is getting really messy.)
-Some quaver rests are inside notes in places (like bar 15) and so should be moved up.
-Generally speaking some of the clef changes I feel like could better placed to reduce ledger lines and aid consistency.
-The dynamic placement is a little off.  Sometimes you have them colliding with other things on the page, and the first piano dynamic should probably be placed in between the staves rather than below.  The dynamics should also probably come in to match the vocals rather than the starts of the bars, I think.
-The slur at the end should probably finish above the fermata rather than below, I think at least.
-I think everything would look a bit cleaner with three bars per system and four systems on page one, five on page two.  This gives a little more room for the clef changes as well, keeping things from getting scrunched up too much.  It also allows you to make better use of your second page, which you're currently only using about half of.
-It looked like the page numbers were messed up in your mus file.

Now perhaps some of that feedback was a little vague, but that was because I've actually whipped up a file for you to look at.  I've made all of the changes above to this file and so you can see exactly what I mean by what I've said.  The most 'up to interpretation' point I made was the one about the left hand accompaniment, so feel free to tinker with it further to your liking, but at least you can see sort of what I'm going for by looking at this.  Here it is:

If you've got any questions about any of this, definitely ask and I can go further in depth / say new things.  Also, if you are happy with that file then feel free to use it, there's not much point in doing the work twice if you like what you see.

There was one thing I didn't change though, which was the pedal markings.  I've never seen pedal markings like that before, and maybe they'd be better replaced with something more standard (if this is just a case of me not being familiar with it then let me know.)  Also, I added the tempo marking like you asked.

- I'll see what I can do with those to make it interesting

The general rhythm looks good, but as I said over discord I'm not a big fan of the run you have written in on beat 4 of bar 4.  I understand that it's meant to emulate the drum roll, but I find that it's a bit too much of a deviation from the original for me.  I know you've said that you want to make your arrangements less like transcriptions, and that's fine, we never demand that sheets be exact transcriptions (in fact in many cases it would be impossible) but it was my understanding that the aim of NSM was to recreate the sounds of the original pieces to the best of our abilities for performing on piano.  With that in mind, I don't think the run is appropriate really and if you wanted to emulate the roll I think that alternating octaves would be a much better fit to produce a similar sound to that of the original.

Other than that though the edits look good to me.  Although on a second listen I'm thinking that maybe there are bass Bbs on beat 2 of bar 2 but because they're in a different register they didn't stand out to me as much the first time.  If you wrote them in as octaves it'd overlap with the Bbs you have written in the right hand though, so maybe just single notes would be better for those (or you could leave them out to emphasise the extra 'bassyness' on beat 3 I suppose.)

Betcha didn't see this one comin', did ya?

You are correct, there was no way I could have predicted this.

Generally speaking, this looks really good.  Just a few things:

-I'm not 100% convinced on the value of mixing tenutos and slurs (like on beat 1 of bar 10) but maybe you're thinking something that I'm not (I'd guess it'd have something to do with emphasis).
-I know you weren't sure whether to include percussion or not, but there are actually some tuned As playing in bars 3-4 in the same rhythmic pattern as the percussion which would make a nice intro into the main loop, at least in my opinion.
-http -> https.  (Have people fixing up old WIPs for submission lately [or just submitting old sheets I guess.])
-In the first two bars I think we're missing the 'punchyness' of the bass on those chords.  Also it's making the chords in bar 2 sound off because you're actually missing the correct harmonies by missing out the bass notes there (F -> G I think).  I think the solution would be to bring the right hand off of the high A early so it can play the chords and have the left hand move to a lower octave to play the bass notes.  It'd be quite idiomatic I think as well that way.
-Speaking of those chords in bars 1-2, I think that they would be a nice place for a sforzando.
-The left hand chords at the end of bar 12 sounded kind of off to me when I played them on piano, but checking the notes they seemed right to me.  So... I'm not really sure what's going on there but as I can't find anything specifically wrong it's probably fine.  (It's probably just playing the chords in a vacuum sounds odd but in the correct context they're fine.)
-Something I just noticed and I really hope that it isn't like this on your template, but your copyright is slightly misaligned to the right.

This is pretty cool, hadn't heard this one before.

Firstly, notes look good apart from two places:
-Last note in bar 14 should be a Dn not an En.
-In the first set of four semiquavers in the last bar, the G# should be an Fn (it should be Bn -> Fn -> Dn -> Fn).

Other things:

-I said this on your last sheet where I admit it was kind of debatable whether articulations were necessary but here I think it's really vital that they be here.  The composer has put a lot of effort into getting different kinds of sounds out all over the place and the best way to get that across on the sheet is by articulations.  Slurring your grace notes would be a good place to start, but there are loads of others.  I get that you're seemingly not particularly fond of articulations, but I think it would be a really good idea to have a go at it here.  There's so much that could be done to bring this sheet to life.  If you need suggestions I can go more into detail, but I would recommend having a go yourself at seeing what you can come up with.
-You've tried very hard to get this onto a single sheet I can tell, but the result is that the whole thing looks very squished.  You've also had to go to a staff size of 0.54cm to achieve this which is frankly too small and you should really be aiming for above 0.6cm to keep it readable at the piano.  The only way I can see this comfortably sitting on one sheet is by using a lot of repeat sections, which is something I'm personally not too fond of.  If it were me doing this, I would definitely take this to two sheets and I'd recommend you do the same.
-Some accidental spellings:
The Ab in bars 3 and 7 I'd change to a G# (leading tone in harmonic minor).
The Ab, Gb, Fb and Eb in bars 17-18 I'd change to G#, F#, En and D#.  (Ab->G# for the same reason as before for consistency/harmonic reasons [the chords they make are nicer this way] also the Eb should be a D# because it resolves back to En.)
Similarly the Ab in bar 25 should be a G#.

-There are few places where I'm worried about playability.  Everywhere you have grace notes into an octave in the right hand I think it'd be better if you moved the graces up so that they're going into the top of the octave rather than the bottom.  Why?  Well because of the way the right hand is, when you're playing an octave all of your fingers are on one side and your thumb is alone on the other, so it's much easier to play notes directly before the octave with your fingers at the top rather than your thumb at the bottom.  In fact, it's very awkward to play these as written, especially up to tempo.  Another thing that worries me are the semiquaver runs in the lower layer in bars 11, 13 and 26.  As written they're very awkward I think, but perhaps with some careful omission of notes and shifting of octaves it could be made more pianistic while retaining the same feel.
-http -> https.
-I noticed that for the crazy thing in bar 1 you wrote in the reverb as a second layer, but in bar 14 you emulated it with pedal.  I personally prefer the idea of emulating it with pedal (as it's massively easier and less awkward) but I was just wondering why you chose to handle those two places differently.
-Some of the tremolo markings are a little short and could probably do with adjusting (I'm thinking about the ones between the C and Eb at the end of each of those sections.)

Thank you for replacing another of Commander6's atrocities.

Request / Re: [Wii] Super Mario Galaxy - "Loopdeeloop Galaxy"
« on: July 15, 2019, 06:23:12 PM »
(notably this one)

This got a laugh out of me.

Make sure you search through the fulfilled requests before you make a new one, even if you don't see it on the site.

This is kind of my fault, as I suggested them to post here.  But it's a good thing to bear in mind!

and made the repeat actually work in playback since it didn't before.

Oh nice haha.

Anyway I'm all done here, approved!

Nice!  All the edits look good.  Only thing left is that I think somewhere in the edited the grace notes have been ruffled a little with respect to the slurs and some probably need adjusting.  For example bar 35 has a slur over a grace note, the slur in bar 44 hasn't attached properly to the grace note.  There's some other similar issues dotted around the whole sheet.  (Might have been changing the number of bars per system?)

Once that's fixed I'll approve, it's looking great!

I also support using Trasdegi's Musescore template and XML formatter in It worked for my latest transcription that I submitted to NinSheetMusic (I also use Musescore to write my submissions).  Here's a link if you want to check it out / use it in future.  It should help keep formatting done in musescore intact when transferred over to finale, as well as sorting out a few other things.

Onto to the arrangement itself!

-Normally when you have additive time signatures you have them notated as such in the time signature itself rather than as a marking.  You might have done it because you weren't sure on how to do it in musescore (which I do not know) but I do know how to do it in finale so I can add it in for you.  It would look like this:
-It might just be the video you linked doing something funny at the start, but I actually don't hear the first left hand note in bar 1.
-I don't have anything to say formatting wise since I guess Levi sorted that all out for you.  It's probably a good idea to take note of what he did so that you know what to do next time.  (Thanks by the way Levi!)
-I'm not 100% convinced on the staccato pattern in the left hand bars 18 onwards.  It feels oddly specific and I can't really hear it like that in the original so it might be worth coming up with something a little more natural (like maybe all the lower notes staccato and the top ones not staccato).
-I get that the notes are there, but some of the quaver runs of triads are a little awkward to play and it might be worth cutting some notes there for playability purposes.
-Some of the beaming was a little off in places.  In 3+2+2+2 split the 3 group off from the rest and I wouldn't beam across groups unless you can get the whole of all of the groups you beam across.  There's also a few places in the 4/4 section where you can write crotchet tied to quaver as a dotted crotchet and similarly minim tied to crotchet as dotted minim.  I think you can fix beaming in notepad so just have a look through and see if you can fix them all.  If you need any help, ask!

Everything else looked good, nice work!

Off-Topic / Re: Pet peeves!
« on: July 15, 2019, 03:26:04 PM »
Never seen this thread before.

Personally, I've always been tempted to call a future pet Peeve just so I can make terrible jokes constantly.

Back to Octopath again I see.  The game still feels new to me but I guess it's like over a year old now?

-http -> https
-Your staff size is currently around 0.5cm which is too small really.  I'd bring it up to at least 0.6cm or it's just too difficult to read for a lot of people.  Obviously that will mean the music will take up more space, but you can alleviate that by bringing your distance between staves down to the standard 1inch (not 100% sure why it was set at 1.18 anyway as I don't think you're really ever using the extra space between the staves.)
-The left margin should be larger than the right margin, probably around 0.65-0.7 but the exact value isn't really important I don't think.  It's just to allow for people hole-punching the sheets to bind them if they want to.
-I had a mess around with the above changes and I could still just about get it onto two pages doing it, but it does look a little cramped and so I think you might be better served gaining a page to aid readability.  But see what you can come up with, it's possible you might find a way to keep it on two pages while still being clear.
-Everywhere else you include the upbeat aside in your slur apart from the phrases starting at bar 11 and 21.  (By upbeat I just mean the last quaver, not the whole three.)  Would it not make more sense to include these ones as well in the slur?
-Missing repeat marking at the end.
-The copyright is too low at the moment and should be vertically aligned with the bottom margin (i.e. set vertical alignment to 0).
-Probably a copy/paste issue, but the left hand in bars 39-40 should probably look more like bars 41-42.  (The same rhythms would probably work though.)

The rest looks great to me!

Feedback / Re: New Submission Feature(s) Request
« on: July 15, 2019, 12:06:42 AM »
This isn't a full response, but just pointing out a few things before I go to bed.

YouTube Link Embedding

My only worry with this is for strange edge cases where either A: a youtube video isn't available or B: More than one youtube videos are required.  But you could always include an option to override the required youtube video for those purposes (but maybe have the default be requirement so that new people don't forget).


Email-bumping does actually already exist, but it's a feature that you have to turn on by subscribing to the submission thread.  Perhaps we could work about making this feature more visible and maybe even have it set up by default for submission threads.

Another thing is that maybe, especially for new arrangers, the updaters could be more clear what exactly we mean when we 'bump' a submission.  I.e. letting them know that what will happen if they don't respond etc.

Thanks for writing this up though, it's very useful for us to see how people view the system and consider improvements to it.  I'll probably have more to say on this at a later point (maybe after some others have chipped in?).

Off-Topic / Re: Official "I'm Away Topic"
« on: July 14, 2019, 11:12:52 PM »
For better or for worse, I have returned!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 75

Page created in 0.138 seconds with 21 queries.