NinSheetMusic Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


NinSheetMusic is the LARGEST video game sheet music archive on the entire internet worldwide!

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 - Brassman388

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 176
Submission Archive / Re: [GB] Mega Man IV - "Dr. Wily Stage" by
« on: November 11, 2018, 04:44:32 AM »
Probably the only time that I wouldn't mind if we changed to european measurements and standards, but nonetheless.

Like I said, I'm not finicky about it being not too much under 5 inches because I understand the whole centimeters to inches thing, but there has to be some consistency.

Submission Archive / Re: [GB] Mega Man IV - "Dr. Wily Stage" by
« on: November 10, 2018, 04:53:30 AM »
I dont' remember it being a problem before, and I'm pretty stiff about margin spacing for everyone.

Also, I'm referring to the file data for spacing itself. Which is why I said less than 5 inches. A screen cap does no justice if you're trying to make a point about it being insignificant. I caught it visually and verified it with the margin spacing from the file.

The spacing is fine, nominal even. But be sure to make all (or most) of the sides of the page around the same size. Because...!

It's not consistent on all sides. It would be different if it was the one side, but these settings make the sheet look lopsided.

Submission Archive / Re: [GB] Mega Man IV - "Dr. Wily Stage" by
« on: November 10, 2018, 04:18:10 AM »
Any particular reason you have it less than 0.5 inches??

Conversion problems from centimeters, perhaps?

Submission Archive / Re: [GB] Mega Man IV - "Dr. Wily Stage" by
« on: November 10, 2018, 04:01:11 AM »
Margin on the right side of the page in the pdf is incredibly small.

Submission Archive / Re: [GB] Mega Man V - "Pluto Stage" by
« on: November 10, 2018, 03:59:54 AM »
Ultimately it's not really up to us though; the differing opinions you're getting tells you that this isn't a cut and dry issue and as such the only thing you can do in this situation is listen to everyone's opinion and then come to your own conclusion.

In addition to this you need to come to a decision to what looks the best or, what functions the best in what you're trying to write out. Clear, concise, and legible.

It's not like I'm going to withhold my approval if you don't do it exactly the way I would, and I don't think any of the other updaters would take that approach either.

Possibly, but I will contest before I say anything in definite.

I'll be back with more useful comments regarding the actual arrangement if we can't come to a consensus.

Submission Archive / Re: [GCN] Kirby Air Ride - "Fire" by Greg
« on: November 10, 2018, 03:53:13 AM »
Looks good to me

This is a great improvement from the original arrangement we had. I'm also glad to see another person doing kirby air ride stuff.

It looked fine from what I saw, not too many spots that need attention visually until we solve some other aspects of this arrangement.

While I know how difficult it can be to essentially reduce a score from a band or orchestral arrangement, I know that it can be done. It just takes some time and a little patience to figure out what works where and how you can get around only having two hands. The range of the arrangement is very top heavy. What I mean by that is that there isn't a lot of bass stuff going on. This can create the problem of emptiness and unbalance. Let's take a look at measure 11 - 14; where you have the two 16th's followed by an 8th hits on the first beat of each measure. Those spots are a perfect opportunity to either throw those notes in the bass either an octave down, or to double them an octave down. This will create a much fuller sound, and a much more powerful effect leading the listener into the next section.

To solve most of these problems is to just thinker with inverting chords, choosing the appropriate notes, and either moving some of those counter melodies to the other hand, or just dropping them all together. You have to come to terms that you won't get everything into one arrangement, but at the same time you want to have the fullest sound you can achieve and sometimes that doesn't involve countermelodies. Bass lines and figures are always first in my book. When choosing notes in a chord, always remember that the 5th of the chord spelling is the odd man out; meaning if you were to drop a note from a dense chord like a major 7th chord, it will almost always be the 5th.

These are just age old practices that us musicians/composers use. It's under a few theory principles, but ultimately what it comes down to is how does it sound afterward? How much can you sacrifice before you start not being able to recognize the tune?

I'm always willing to help. You can either shoot me a message here or on Discord.

I hope this helps.

Check your files. There seems to be a lot more problems that sprung up within the last conversion.

If you're on discord, pm me the pdf of how you think it should look with all the changes and what not. From there I'll make a fresh file.

It's really close!

But, even out the systems with enough space to not crowd the copyright; also, don't forget to add NSM's url in the copyright!

Those last things and this gets a green from me.

Just ask one of the updaters maybe and we'll get it done.

At least, i'm always here for the arranger. If you ask me to convert files from the bare bottom, all I ask is you do most of the conversion work thru notepad and I'll finish up with my full version. It keeps you, the arrangers, happy, and us, the staff, happy.

We're here to produce work, or music. Any small obstacles such as this is a misnomer, and can be remedied if we just work together rather than putting it one just one person.

Tras has done more than enough. Most of the staff has done more than enough. And the site is well more than willing to accept what music you want to produce. All you have to do is the work and ask either me or one of the updaters (maybe, me for sure) to help you out with formatting and the nitty gritty.

I hope you continue to stay and become part of NSM.

Not bad so far, but this can definitely be improved upon.

First thing I notice is that the first system is not indented. Kinda like the way the first line of text in a formal paper is. I would go with a 0.5 in indentation.

The second thing is how the text in the title may be a little too big. I wouldn't have it go past the margins, hell, I would even give them a little more space if it gets too close.

Which brings me to margins along all the sides of the page; I usually go for <0.5 in. Any larger it starts to look clunky.

"a tempo" should be just like that, and not "a tiempo."

I also prefer the 'rit.' to be on the bottom of the stave. I forget what the exact rules are for this one because we had a discussion about it in another post. I'll leave it to my other cohorts to clarify this one.

Yeah, just fix up those things and I think we'll be in business.

Great work.

Looks good to me.

Great job.

Yeah, once this is updated and you confirm this is acceptable to you, one of us will accept it.

Thanks for giving this a chance.

A few more things from me then we'll be done here.

First is the margins; I prefer them to all be even but there's some leeway if you're considering whole punching. If that's the case, then the margins on each page need to be alternating from right to left on each odd to even page.

Second is the layering from m. 13 to 18; specifically m. 16 where you have the whole note B in the second layer, but the first layer 16th's cell of notes flipped. Just flippy flip them where the staves are right side up and that's it.

Third is articulations and its consistency; on the second page in measures 14, 16, and 18 you'll notice that the rhythmic pattern is almost identical, and is for sure in m. 16, and 18. In m. 14, however, is not. I see that, but the articulation that you have on beat 3 in 16 and 18 have staccato's while the beat 3 in 14 does not. I would prefer this to have a staccato, or if m. 16 and 18 to be just a 16th note. My thinking is that it's not a new pattern so why change it visually?

Last thing is your dynamic placement; In the first measure you can go ahead and place the dynamics along with the hairpin in the middle of the stave. You can't resound the chord in the upper stave so there should be no confusion as to what is crescendo-ing. For m. 4  instead of having the note about the right hand with the hairpin, you can just put on the bottom stave "senza dim." under the lower staff where you have the mezzoforte in parenthesis. You would have to do a little finale magic to have the program perform this correctly. This also means that you can get rid of the mezzoforte in m. 6 also since the previous "senza dim." is notated. Keep the mezzopiano in between m. 6. NOW you can have the mezzopiano in parenthesis in measure 13. Since a lot has happened and we're more than halfway through the song. I would prefer to not have a dynamic under the bottom staff, as per NSM guidelines, but I can't think of a solution in its stead. Maybe Libera can offer her advice.

I think that's pretty much it for now.

Great job so far.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 176

Page created in 0.121 seconds with 21 queries.