Messages

I'm having trouble understanding what you mean by this. The C in m34 is quite strong and so I'm having trouble making picking out a distinct E, however, I do have an E played in the RH already so would another one be necessary? (And m35 has two different Es)

Maybe it's easier to try and hear the L.H. C# in m33 jump up a minor third to the E in m34? I mostly mentioned it because it was the bass note, which changes the inversion and thus slightly changes the feel of the chord. The Em for example sounds a bit less grounded without the E below.

So that harp resolution I had chose to ignore (and thought I had mentioned it here but I checked and I didn't, oops) because I feel that in the original, the different instruments make that early resolution more palatable, but on piano it just feels like a distraction from the string melody. I didn't include that change here, but if people insist then I'll make the change. (I did remove the tied notes, though)

I figured that was what you were going for yeah, but I figured that if the L.H. restrikes on the last bar, it gives the same effect of an actual resolution. So in other words, a softer 1-note resolution in m68 beat 3 (which is the harp), and a stronger full chord resolution in m69 (which is the rebowed strings + string melody). If you still prefer keeping it as is though, that's fine too, because I do agree it distracts a bit from the main melody ^^

-m3: I hear the guitar go the G on beat 2 here too
-m28: The clarinet goes up to A a bit on beat 3.5 before ending on a trill on G in the next bar, maybe you could include those notes minus the trill? A similar thing happens in m32
-m59-67: The piano plays an octave above the L.H. notes too, did you leave them out consciously?

-m4: Maybe instead of Cb you could use Bn here? It sounds like it's supposed to resolve back to a C
-m5: There's a little orchestra hit run going on that sounds like it's going Cb-Ab, Bb-G, Cb-Ab, Bb-G, Cb Ab Bb Cb. Including it with the chords I'd probably arrange it like this myself, but maybe see if you like something else instead or just wanna keep it as is:
You cannot view this attachment.
-m21: I think the high C is on beat 3.25 instead of on a second note of a triplet?

That's all though, looking good!

For the key signature: m1-8 and 17-24 should be in G#m (scale is the G# minor pentatonic/blues scale, notice how the G# sounds like the "home" key), and m9-16 and 25-32 in Bm (scale is mostly B minor pentatonic, with some blues-y D#'s thrown in as well: the G#'s are more of a dorian sound, which is raising the 6th note in a minor scale)
-m11: Maybe you could write the staccato 8th A on beat 2.25 in the L.H. as a staccato 16th instead?
-m11 and 14: It's best to break the beam of the triplet + two 16ths in the R.H. on beat 4, similar to your Sonic sheet a little while back using the Beam Break Tool.
-m13: I don't hear the R.H. F# on beat 2.75

-For the pickup measure, it might look a bit nicer to have a pickup of 2 beats length (so with an 8 rest before), so it doesn't start halfway through a beat.
-m16: I hear Dn instead of D# on beat 3.5 in the R.H.
-m34 and 35: I hear an E in the cello (and piano in m35) which could go in the L.H.
-m68-69: The harp (annoyingly) already goes to the B in beat 3 of m68, but it kinda sounds like the other strings also rebow at m69, so maybe that helps finishing off the piece like this:
You cannot view this attachment.

My thought for these places was to show where the right hand and left hand parts line up and to make it obvious that the note lengths are supposed to be the same between hands. However, I do see how readablility may be better in some ways with the suggested rhythm so I'm not against changing it, I just wanted to explain my thoughts first. If you think the other way is better I'd be happy to change it!

I see where you're coming from yeah, but I think the lining up is already easily visible because they line up vertically, and the note lengths are pretty clear as well (the player probably wouldn't play a single 16th note on beat x.25 any different than one in beat x.75)

I definitely see how this part is difficult. I like what you've suggested for the first one - for m16 I had to change the right hand a bit due to the different melody, but I think it works out alright. For the second one, I've made one small change from your suggestion - I think making beat 3.5 an A instead matches up with the original bassline better and doesn't add too much difficulty. Thanks for the ideas here!

Looking good! In m20 and 24, you can flip the staccatos back to their standard position (notehead side), as the rest below is hidden.

-Yeah I did a lot of playtesting in this section and splitting the fourths was definitely easier for m29/31, but it was less clear cut for m30/32. Splitting the two lines for the first part of the measure is fine with me.

Looking at it again, maybe in m30 and 32 you could move the D in beat 4.5 to the R.H. too?

Everything else looks good though! Definitely a difficult piece, but probably a bit more manageable now ^^

- less accentuated. The first time around, I didn't even hear those notes because of the way the music is mixed, and thus decided I needed a way to indicate they're quieter than the notes surrounding them. So with that in mind, what should I change about them? And which notes in specific?

You could move any single notes in m2 (a C), 4 (another C) and 6 (D and C) down an octave, so the L.H. can use the 3rd to 5th finger to play those notes. That is, if you don't mind them sounding lower. They're still less accentuated that way ^^
Everything else looks good!

Oops, listening again I clearly hear a G# on beat 2 - that forms a chromatically ascending line with beats 3 and 4 that stands out quite a bit to me. I think I would personally emphasize those notes and leave the Eb in the right hand as is, what do you think?

I went with octaving the tuba part and adding accents to them too, because leaving out the bottom Eb's makes the next part sound a bit empty. I wrote the G# as an Ab though, as G#-Eb-G# looks a bit weird in the L.H.

Cool! I do think that the pedal release markings might be a little confusing placed under the time signature, which doesn't really represent a moment in time where the pedal should be released. Is the intent to lift the pedal as the pickup eighth is played? Or at the beginning of the next measure?

Ah yeah, it was supposed to be the beginning of next measure, changed them accordingly!

Also one thing I forgot to mention last time - is the use of the bracket alongside the finger number in m. 22-23 standard? I feel like I typically see it beside the noteheads instead for clarity. Either way, I think the intention is probably clear enough that you don't need it after the first instance. (Also unrelated but the parentheses are rather close to the forte here - maybe pad them with space??)

What I had was the way I saw it in Behind Bars (though with the brackets accidentally reversed), but tbh I don't specifically remember if I've seen it before like that, if I have actually ever seen it. I think the bracket before the notes is clearer though, so I went with that!

Files updated!

This looks really decent, I don't have much to say!

-m2, 4 and 6: Did you leave some of the bass notes as single notes so they're more playable, or less accentuated? For the first one I think it's fine to leave them as octaves too, but for the second one maybe you could move the single notes down an octave, as that is a little bit easier to play for the L.H. (since you're able to use other fingers than the thumb)
-There's a bass drum hit in m12 and 16 on beat 1.5, which you could imitate in the L.H.
-m17 and 19: You could shrink the size of the 8th rest on beat 1 too if you want. The tie at the end of m16 should be flipped (it is flipped coming into m17 already), as well as the tie at the end of m18

- Is there a reason you split up the RH rhythm in the latter half o m. 16 and similar into the triplet + three eighths? Normally it'd be the triplet and beat 3.5 beamed together, and 4-4.5. It doesn't seem too off as is, but it did catch my eye

Not particularly, I knew I wanted some distinction between the triplet and the 8th on beat 3.5, but the bracket I added now is probably better than doing what I had before.

- Have you considered some way of trying to incorporate the low G on beat 2 of m. 35? It feels kind of weird without it leading into the A-Bb on beats 3 and 4.

I didn't notice it at first I think, but I think I hear a low Eb instead of a G? Either way, I added below the L.H., and was able to put the top Eb's in the R.H.

- Is the melody in m. 37/39/etc. raised an octave to make jumping to/from the higher voices easier?

I think that might've been my original thought yeah, but it's possible to keep them in the original octaves, so I moved them down!

- Maybe move the eighth rests in m. 38/42 back to their mid-staff positions?

m38 isn't possible anymore because of the D#, and m42 feels a bit close, but I went with them moving up one stave space per row

- You could move systems closer together on all pages past the first to give more room underneath the header.

Turns out I actually had loads of space left below each page to fit another system on each of page 2-4 as well as give more room underneath the header, which also saves a page. How lucky!

Fixed everything else too, thanks for taking a look!

There isn't an official soundtrack release of this game yet, but both gamerips on khinsider use a filename like Dark Forest, so that's probably the closest to an official title that we're gonna get for the time being. Other names I've seen used are Mushroom Forest or Fungi Mines Theme.

On a second thought, I'm going to archive this one for now and submit something else that should be a bit less daunting (as both of my current subs are atm :p). I'll resubmit later!

Nice work on this! I remember playing this one or two times for Ethan on the performance events, haha. I mostly have some suggestions regarding playability/performance and adding of voices:

-m1: There's a G between the R.H. D's in beat 1
-m3: You could include the horn F and G on beat 1 and 3 (F with the R.H. and G with the L.H.)
-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.
-m16: You could include some of the thirds below the R.H. here too, or alternatively, you could have the L.H. help playing all the missing notes (the jump up is still pretty doable at this speed for me, but it's definitely harder than keeping it in the R.H.).
-m17: Either continuing from m16 or just in general, you could have the L.H. help with the piano part in this bar, as it's a bit easier to play the piano and piccolo part separately, and it's possible for the L.H. to keep the F-Bb held down.
-m19: I think the pianist ties over the F in beat 2.875 (never had to think about beat counts with 32nd notes yet lol), instead of restriking? It sounds more legato and less jumpy
-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?
-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)
-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? Also, I think you could add a tenuto or short pedal mark on this first chord, as well as a staccato on the L.H. chord on beat 3, as they're of a considerably different length.
-m24-26: Like in m23 you could add some tenutos/pedal marks on the stacked-fifth-chords.
-m25: For the R.H. beat 1, maybe you could put the A from the trumpet in a separate voice from the piano, so the piano can play tenuto and the A staccato? For the piano part you could add in the G below the C too (the G-An is not much wider than other chords here), but for the F there's a similar stretch for either the L.H. or the R.H.: for hand-span consistency you could then put the F in brackets.
Lastly for this measure, you could add the legato in the R.H. from beat 2 to beat 3 like in m23
-m26-27: Maybe you could put the En and D at the end of the R.H. in m26 and the bottom En in m27 in the L.H., for easier playability?

Love these boss themes Bloop. For this one I'm curious why you wrote m. 36-47 in 3/4+7/8 as opposed to just 13/8. It seems like the latter would be more elegant, since the rhythm stays consistent across those measures.

Glad you're enjoying them! I think either would've worked technically, but these two measures feel more like two separate measures to me rather than one long measure. Also, I usually think breaking up longer time signatures into smaller sections makes it a bit easier to keep track of how the beats are subdivided rather than something like 2+2+2+2+2+3

Title info from here. The OST titles aren't uploaded on youtube (this is the only channel that has uploaded the soundtrack), but I have the OST myself and found that this is the correct title.