NinSheetMusic Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Don't forget to submit your daily replacement!

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 - ManOfDucks

Pages: [1] 2
1
Quote
I went ahead and tried editing it in AudioStretch to hear it better because I couldn't hear the four D's you were talking about in the same electronic instrument that doubles the guitar melody, and it seems like it goes D-C-D-F instead of D-D-D-D or eighth rest-D-F (check out Latios's AudioStretch guide if you've never used it before and would like to). Sorry for all the flip-flopping! It's hard to tell at this section... I personally lowered it an octave and slowed it down to 50%, but you could try something else.

I've never heard of AudioStretch before, but after putting the piece in I definitely agree it's not 4 Ds! The second note to me sounds like it goes up then back down so I settled on D-Eb-D for the first three. The fourth one is the faintest for me to hear but I'll trust your judgment and put it as an F!

Quote
Sorry for all the flip-flopping!

No need to apologize this is a devil measure.

Quote
Also, my comment about moving the mf was only for the case where you'd only use two sixteenth notes instead of four, because now it's on top of the LH hit too when I think that should stay at forte. And since that case is off the table now, you could move it back if that would be what you'd prefer

Makes sense, I moved the mf back to its original position.

Quote
Good work once again :>

Thanks, I appreciate it!

2
Quote
I'm hearing this, although the top part is pretty faint (and I was wrong about it being C-E#, oops):

I still can't find this part, could you tell me which voice you're hearing it in? I might just not be picking it out of the texture.

Quote
put the mf on the pickup part

I did change this though!

Quote
Oh you're right. I just auto-hit yes when it prompts me to adjust articulations whenever I open a file from an older version of Finale, and the default position must mess with those. I did notice that in measure 33 it looks a bit off though, and I think it would be better to flip beats 3-4 in the LH there so you could still have staccatos on the notehead side without interfering with the ledger lines. It would also take up less space. In measures 29 and 31, it might be better to flip the staccatos to the stem side, but that could be up to you

Fixed these!

Quote
You're welcome! One other thing though is that in measure 40, you should also show beat 3 on the second layer (so the quarter note under that tied eighth should be an eighth note tied to another eighth note). Sorry for not explaining it fully!

No need to apologize, I'm the one that overlooked it :P

It should be fixed now!

3
Quote
m8 last eighth note sounds like a tied G# power chord instead of Gn

I'm assuming you mean having that last 8th note tied to the first 8th note of measure 9. If that's not what you meant then this comment probably doesn't make sense: I hear a distinct difference in pitch between those two notes, and I'm also hearing two separate attacks for those counts. It's kind of muddy in the guitar part, but I think it's easier to hear in the bass part.

Quote
m9 instead of four D's on beat 4, there's a pickup on beat 4.5 that goes C-E# on top and A-C on the bottom. The A-C one sounds a lot more prominent to me, but you could go with either choice

I've listened and listened to this part, but I can't seem to hear what you're referring to? What I'm hearing is sixteenth pickups in whatever electronic instrument is doubling the guitar melody that begins in the next measure.

Quote
m16 RH second quarter note should be an eighth note tied to another eighth note

I like this idea, I think it makes the syncopated rhythm a little easier on the eyes :) Fixed!

Quote
m17 RH beat 3-4 notes should be En-D-En-D-F instead of F-En-F-En-F#

Boom fixed.

Quote
m25 RH I think it would be nice to include the notes Bn, A, G, and F# to fill it out more

Nice ear! I completely missed those notes on my first time through!

Quote
m36-37 RH flip the articulations here so that they're on the notehead side

All of the articulations on my end are on the notehead side. MSF was having some issues with articulations in another one of my sheets because he was using a different version of Finale than me, could that be causing the issue?

Quote
m40 instead of using another dotted quarter note, show beat 3 here
m41 RH flip the tie on the bottom note so that it points down

Done and done!

Quote
m58-59 RH missing G and F# on top

I hear what you're talking about in measure 59, but I can't hear it in measure 58.

Quote
m60 I believe it is standard to avoid staccatos on dotted notes in simple time signatures

Thank you for the advice, I switched it to a staccato 8th note followed by a sixteenth rest.

Thank you for the helpful feedback!

4
Quote
- I think the dotted quarter in m. 31 would make more sense flipped downwards since it's continued in the lower layer. Accordingly, might make sense to put a quarter rest above it for the upper layer.

Done.

Quote
- I'm not too sure what the need is for some of these courtesy accidentals:

I just read through it and put them in whenever I missed an accidental. That being said there are far better sight-readers than me out there so I went ahead and removed the ones you suggested!

Quote
- Once the courtesy accidentals (or lack of) are settled, make sure you have the right amount of space at the beginning of each measure, e.g. 40 and 48 have a bit much space because they already had extra space to account for the layers before introducing the courtesy accidentals.

I combed back over the sheet and tried to remove the extra space in the measures I caught. I think it looks better but let me know if I missed any glaring spots!

Quote
You could also use the Measure Tool to add a specific amount of space at the beginning of certain measures (like 0.05 in.) instead of using the Note Mover Tool to make the beat 1s less squished when there are multiple layers or accidentals.

I had no idea this was a feature, thank you for the advice and the feedback!


6
Quote
Alrighty, I apologize for the wait.

No need to apologize, I understand how busy things can get this time of year!

Quote
M. 7 & 15 (LH): Maybe it's just me, but I'm not hearing that low A. Either it's an instrument different than the bassoon (or whatever) that I'm not hearing, or it's not there.

There is an A played by a string bass pizzicato in the recording, but it's way less prominent than the E in the bassoon. I was already debating keeping both the A and the E there because I think it sounds kinda gross having a random 5th in the bass, so I went ahead and removed it anyway since the E sticks out more in the recording.

Quote
M. 22 (and recurring; LH): Looong ago on one of my very first submissions, Deku/Olimar, can't remember which, told me to never repeat the same note in a LH waltz accompaniment like this. In my opinion (and from what I was told many years ago), I wouldn't recommend repeating the downbeat note along with the second and upbeat notes. Additionally, I've never seen professionally published piano music do this. My personal recommendation would be to get rid of the top C in the octave on beat 1.

For measure 22 I removed the C from the pah-pahs and kept the upper C since that's what's going on in the bassoon and I'd like to try and preserve that. I removed the bottom C to keep in line with what I did in measures 7/15/etc... since the string bass pizzicatos aren't as easy to hear. In measures 66-67 I removed the doubled notes on the pah-pahs as well.

Quote
M. 26 (RH): Playability concerns are what come to mind in this measure. If your highest goal is to preserve the notes, it'll be fine. It's not impossible for sure. I just wanted to note that it's not the easiest to play.

I don't think this measure is too bad to play, but if needed I think it's something the performer could always just cut the middle note out of.

Quote
M. 68: I would recommend a FF (double forte) since it sounds more intense than the previous measures.
M. 69 (Both hands): Similarly, an accent on the first note of this measure would be nice.

I think since the voicing gets thicker in these two measures it'll naturally be louder than the preceding measures, plus I feel like if the dynamic was written as FF it'd be interpreted as really hammering out those couple chords rather than just upping the intensity for a couple counts. That being said, I'm not super stubborn on this one and I'd be willing to change it if you still want me to!

Quote
- From what I'm seeing, there's an inconsistency with how the layers are being written. For example, M. 31 (and others like it), the rest in one of the layers is hidden, while in M. 32 (and others like it), the rest is present.

There's a reason for this!
Quote
I made some of the rests visible, but there were a couple I left hidden (measures 35, 39, 43, and 47). I left these ones hidden for two reasons. The first is I don't think it's too confusing to have hidden rests in these measures since the rhythm in the second layer is quarter notes and they line up with the bass rhythm. The main reason though is that in measure 43 the layer 1 note is in an awkward place in the staff so I would either have to have the rest down between both staffs (which I thought would be even more confusing), or way above the staff (which I thought looked kinda silly). Because I couldn't get that one to work I decided to leave the other measures like it (35, 39, and 47) with their rests hidden just to maintain consistency.

Static also pointed out that the rests I have visible are part of the melody and help draw attention to it, while the rests I have hidden are only part of an accompanying line, so it kind of ends up fitting.


Quote
- Some of the chords in the LH sound muddy. That could be resolved by inverting the triads up.

I don't think the finale playback does this piece justice :P. Most of them sound fine on an actual piano (in my opinion), but there were a couple (measures 50/51/and 62) where I went through and changed the inversions where I thought it made it sound less grumbly and didn't result in any leaps that were too wacky.

Quote
- I've noticed that you have a few courtesy accidentals, which is good! But I would recommend combing through again and placing some where it'd be beneficial.

I've added some in the following measures: 21 LH, 26 both hands, 28 both hands, 41 LH, 46 LH, and 48 LH!

Thank you very much for the helpful feedback!

7
Quote
but personally I prefer to use standard major/minor key signatures and add accidentals to show the mode.

Makes sense, thanks for the insight!

Quote
I think it would be more helpful to simply indicate the tempo in quarter notes and leave out the q=q marking in m4. Because of how it's presented, by default most people I assume would try to feel the tempo in half notes, but then have to mentally adjust 4 bars in.
You can move part of the composer text to a 2nd line so it's not so long, if you desire.
The slur in m31 LH is touching the last note.
m50 LH should be a Gsus4 chord (resolves to G in m51).
m54 LH sounds like a Em7 (would suggest lowering the E to D on beats 2-3).

Fixed these.

Thank you for the feedback!

8
Quote
Daisuke Matsuoka and James Phillipsen were the only two composers who worked on Bowser's Fury

Fixed this!

Quote
I don't know NSM's exact policy on this, but I think there shouldn't be as many hidden rests in the second voice, while it does make the sheet more cluttered they're sometimes helpful for the performer nonetheless

I made some of the rests visible, but there were a couple I left hidden (measures 35, 39, 43, and 47). I left these ones hidden for two reasons. The first is I don't think it's too confusing to have hidden rests in these measures since the rhythm in the second layer is quarter notes and they line up with the bass rhythm. The main reason though is that in measure 43 the layer 1 note is in an awkward place in the staff so I would either have to have the rest down between both staffs (which I thought would be even more confusing), or way above the staff (which I thought looked kinda silly). Because I couldn't get that one to work I decided to leave the other measures like it (35, 39, and 47) with their rests hidden just to maintain consistency.

Thank you very much for the feedback!

9
I made edits to everything you mentioned except for this:

Quote
I do believe that 12-31 is all up an octave and it might be better to put them up so it retains the bright/sparkling feeling of the original.

I think it sounds thin with that much space between the right and left hand parts. The reason I was only thinking about moving it up an octave for 12-15 was because I thought it sounded a little repetitive since those same four measures are immediately repeated. I think it also adds to the arrangement a little since in the original recording measures 12-15 and 16-19 are played on different instruments. The only reason I haven't moved it up yet is (like I mentioned earlier) I think it sounds thin with so much space between the RH and LH parts.

Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback, I appreciate it!

10
Here are a couple things I caught myself that I was unsure what to do with, it'd be great if I could get a second opinion.

-First 3 measures: I was unsure whether to write it like this in 2/4, or possible write it in 3/4, and then have a metric modulation into the fourth measure of Dotted Quarter = Quarter. Was wondering if anybody had thoughts on this.

-There are a couple spots where the bass pizzicatos and the bassoon have different notes on the downbeat (measures 7, 22, and other places where that bass part is repeated). I think it sounds fine in the recording, but when it's on the piano it just randomly sounds like a fifth and an octave in the bass. I was thinking about possibly removing either the bass pizz notes or the bassoon notes, but couldn't decide which. I think the bassoon notes are more prominent in the recording, but the bass pizz notes are lower pitched, so I could see either being a good choice. I was wondering if anybody could weigh in on this.

-I was also unsure on what NSM's philosophy on writing key signatures for modes was. Should I write the key signature of D major to use the least amount of accidentals, or should I use the key signature of E minor since Dorian is a minor mode?

-Measures 48-49 I can't tell if the notes I have written on LH counts 2&3 are actually being played or if my ear is just making them up, I could use a second opinion!

-Measures 32-51 I was unsure what the standard notation was for stem direction and note placement when there are so many overlapping voices. I tried to keep the strings stem up and the clarinet and oboe stems down (wasn't sure about measure 33 since I only have the string parts written there, should the stems be down like they normally would be, or up to stay consistent with the rest of the line?). From what I've read, stems down notes are supposed to go on the left and stem up notes should go on the right when voices overlap, but I'm not super happy with the way it looks right now and was wondering if anybody had some suggestions for this spot.

-Measure 37 beat one I was uncertain whether to have the staccato above or below the high B.

-In measures 31 and 69, I'm not a wind player, so I was unsure about the staccato on the low F# in the bassoon part is actually a staccato or if it's just the way the player was interpreting the final note in the slur.

-In the section 52-69 I was going to include the high strings part on counts 2&3 in the right hand, but was running into some odd playability issues that I couldn't find a quick fix for that still sounded good. I was thinking that part wasn't super important so it might be fine to leave out of the arrangement, but at the same time I think it offers something different from the oom-pah-pah that's been going on the entire song, so I was wondering if maybe I should include it and try and figure out some convoluted way to make it happen.

-Measure 64 I wrote a courtesy sharp on the first F# in the bass, but was unsure whether or not I should also include one on the first F# in the RH part.

-Measures 12-15 I was considering raising an octave just to make it a little less boring to listen to.

12
Quote
aaaaaa wait one more thing

m1 RH beat 3 should be flipped up

that is all

Done!

13
Quote
Oh, I think I see what's going on... I think the staccato you have for Layer 1 (the cross-staffed note) is actually assigned to Layer 2. Visually, it doesn't make a difference (unless you open it in v26), but it does mean that the cross-staffed note isn't staccato on playback. Should be an easy fix if you delete that staccato and re-assign it to Layer 1, not Layer 2.

Ah, makes sense. Should be fixed now!

Quote
One more suggestion: In m7 and m11, maybe change the fortes to mf, and then jump to forte in m14? mp to f seems excessive in this context since it's not a massive buildup in the original, and I feel like there should also be a dynamic increase from m13 to m14.

Fair point, I've made the edit.

14
Quote
- In m5, I hear LH beats 1-2 doubled in the RH. Also, I hear beat 1.5 as a G# instead of Fx, and I hear a Cn in the RH on beat 1 (see image). If you don't want to double this line in the RH (which is understandable since it's quiet), I would at least suggest adding the Cn to beat 1 in the LH.

I added the C in the bass, but I think it should be a B# since it's in a Byzantine scale. I can hear two distinct pitches on the sixteenth notes of beat 1.5, I think it's a little more clear when that part repeats itself in measure 37. I opted against doubling it in the right hand because I just think it sounds a little odd on the piano.

Quote
- For m15/19 LH, maybe add another note on beat 4.5? Feels a bit strange that the rhythm stops there. Even if the bassline stops there in the original, I think it'd be nice if the LH kept providing a constant eighth-note driving force here.

Good point, I've added an extra eighth note!

Quote
- Double staccatos strike again on m23/27 RH beat 2, lol

I can't find these on my end. I have a staccato on layer 1 and layer 2 of the RH though, so that might be what's causing the issue?

Quote
- Do you want other articulations on the eighth notes on beat 2 of m23/37?

Oops, there was supposed to be a tenuto on the and of beat 2, I've written it in!

15
Quote
- Hm, third harmonies in the LH? I'm not sure if they fit the style of a track like this, at least in my opinion. Maybe try experimenting with fifth harmonies or something else? The thirds work fine, though, if other ideas don't work and/or if you prefer it this way.

The idea in measures 6-13 was to highlight the A Major to G# Major movement that pops up throughout the rest of the piece. I think the thirds help with this more than using 5ths, plus I think having the thirds helps it sound a little less thin since there are so many repeated G#s in this section (also I just think it sounds kinda neat).

I agree with you on measures 14-21 though. I don't think the thirds are really needed since the harmony is already filled out in the right hand, so I went ahead and substituted those notes for root and 5ths. I think this also helps keep the baseline more in the style of the fill in measure 21.

Quote
- The grace note slur on m2 RH beat 4 might look better if went above the note instead of below? Not sure.
- m4/36 LH looks super confusing broken up into two layers, especially without rests (it looks like there's only one layer except the last eighth note is detached and flipped). I would just suggest condensing it into one layer.

Fixed these!

Quote
- For m3/5/35 LH, it's typically not preferred (although still acceptable) to beam eighth notes in groups of three. You might consider breaking up that beam so only the within-beat pair is beamed.

I like beaming notes like this because I think the extra flag looks a little messy when they're separated, but I'm not too stubborn about this one so I went ahead and changed it!

Quote
- You have extra staccatos on m9 RH Layer 1 beats 3-4... not that you can see them because they overlap on your end, but Finale v26 shows all of them. This doesn't actually make a difference but you might as well delete them anyway, lol.

Whoops! v26 users should be safe now!

Quote
- The chord on m14/18/38/42 RH beat 3 sounds a bit out of place to me since it's a full chord surrounded by octaves without any harmonies. Maybe consider either removing one note from this chord, or adding fifths to the other parallel octaves on beats 3-4 (although that would be hard to play).

I left the chord on beat three in because I like how having those inner notes left over from beat 1 helps to emphasize the resolution from A to G#. I added in harmonies to the 3 following 8th notes though. I'm not at a piano atm, but just by fingering through it on my desk I don't think it's that bad to play especially since the B# is held through most of the notes, and the G# in the final 8th note sets you up nicely for the A in the next measure.

Quote
- In m16/20/40 RH, the slur should be extended all the way to the last note. Also helps make the slur not look like a tie.

Done!

Quote
- On that note, I don't like how the slur in m44 RH really does look like a tie at first glance... I guess it's okay, since this is the fourth time the player will have encountered this pattern. The alternative (which I might prefer, but you might not) would just be to remove the slur in this measure.

I'd prefer to leave this slur in just for the sake of consistency, but I'm not too stubborn on this one so I'd be willing to remove it if you still think it's best!

Quote
- I hear m23/27 a bit differently, specifically:

Didn't catch this one, thanks for pointing it out!

Quote
(I also hear beat 1 of m16/20/40/44 RH being tied over, not re-articulated, but I think I'm an outlier in that...)

I agree that the second note isn't articulated, but I think the strings are doing a gliss up to the D# (I'm not a string layer so everything I just said may be false lol). While having to rearticulate it on the piano isn't ideal, I think it's a better alternative to just leaving it a C# or D# the whole measure.

Quote
- m37 RH beat 4, the bottom natural is really close to touching the previous 16th note—could you space them out a bit?

Done!

Quote
- I also hear m39 RH beat 1 differently, specifically (approximately):

This is the single measure in the entire piece that gave me the most trouble! It also didn't help that when the measure is repeated in 43 that I think it's played slightly differently in the recording. After slowing the recording down and relistening to it over and over again, I could distinctly hear the back half of the beat (F# to D# as sixteenths), but I couldn't quite pin down the first half. I can hear it playing D# to F# then back to D#, but the rhythm is still fuzzy. The two closest answers I could come up with were either 3 sixteenth-note triplets (what I have written in now), or 32nd/32nd/16th (which I thought sounded more like a stumble rather than intentional, so I went with the other option). I went back through tonight again and slowed it down and relistened to it on repeat, and this is still what I hear. I really think that this is what's in the recording!

Quote
- For the last measure, I think it would be clearer to show the Layer 2 rest on beat 1 in both hands. Also, it seems a bit inconsistent that you keep the RH Layer 2 flipped up (it would be flipped down by default if there were no Layer 1) but flip the LH Layer 2 down... thoughts?

My thoughts: I think you're right! Fixed these.

Pages: [1] 2

Page created in 0.35 seconds with 22 queries.