Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I haven't seen any Life Force sheets yet.  Life Force's OST was amazing. 

This or any song from Life Force's soundtrack would be great to have sheets for.

I couldn't figure out how fix the first point. I was able to get clarification from Bloop in a private message. I somehow overlooked the other points, but they have been addressed. I also moved the systems upward on the first page. The last system was clashing with the text at the bottom of the page. Files are updated.

-I think this should just be in 4/4? (or 2/2 if you will). This is how I hear the first 6 bars:

The 8bit version is in 3/4, so I use it for the normal version too

-m3, 9 and 44: I think I hear a C underneath this L.H. chord too, at least for a little bit. It makes the chord sound a bit more dissonant than just a Gb major chord.
-m21-24: I hear this in the R.H. in m21 and the L.H. in m21-24: ...
The same thing applies to m27-28, albeit with different notes (and restriking the lower chord in m28)

Added

-m17-18: There's more lower stuff happening in this L.H. chord, maybe it makes sense to write it like this:

I opt for a different voicing to match the register of m13 chord (both dropping the bass C note), and to keep the parallel chord motion to m19

-m33: The middle two ties of the L.H. chord are touching each other, it's probably best to flip their directions.

Fixed. Didn't know ties can be flipped in Finale Notepad before

Awesome! There are some more minor things I found, such as:

• Measure 1: I think the forte marking should be moved down a bit, so it is centered between the staves, and right a bit, so its starts at the same place as the notes.
• The sheet also doesn't have a tempo marking yet, you should probably add one of those.
• There is also a lot of vertical space between the first system and the composer/arranger text, so after adding the tempo marking you should change that.

Did it

Thanks for sharing

Pushing Onwards

I mostly used the double barlines to divide the piece into a few sections, so the player has a little bit of structure. The ones at 19 and 39 for example are there because m1-18 and m19-38 are mostly similar sections, after which a new or extended section begins. I didn't want to put too many double barlines in, though, because that felt a bit excessive.

Alrighty, will defer to your judgement on this one~

Other things look good, although I noticed the measure distribution changed in some places to have some 4-measure systems in seemingly arbitrary places. Any particular reason for that?

Just about ready to approve after that, on faith that the articulations and slurs look okay in your Finale version

- this makes sense, I'll respell them (what's the Finale shortcut for this?)

Not sure if there's a faster way, but I just highlight the chord(s), right click, transpose up/down chromatically a diminished second.

If you want to respell a single note, use the \ key with the notehead highlighted in the Simple Entry Tool. You can also press that shortcut when you have a chord highlighted, but Finale will cycle through the different permutations of possible accidentals instead of immediately respelling the chord in a way that makes sense, which is a bit... weird, so if you're respelling a chord or section it might be easier to do what Static said.

Alright, those decisions all make sense to me. I'll approve

I get that's what it implies or references (I was thinking of similar examples myself), but it doesn't really sound swing at all in the original track there even with the walking bass. I guess in a performance it wouldn't make that much of a difference, though. Maybe someone else has some opinions on that.

And you're right, the walking bass is the thing that makes it feel like swing (and it means a thing oh god bad jazz joke aaaaa). If you were playing a Latin number with other musicians and the bass started to walk, there'd be no question that the message being conveyed would be to swing the jazz 8s.

That makes sense to me, but I'd still consider simplifying m108 anyway by just using the bassline there. I don't see the point in adding a more difficult LH part just to make it match m104, since that's arguably more difficult than just writing the actual part.

1) That's because in the structure of this piece, this is the shout chorus. This is the climax of the piece; it's loud (the only fortissimo in the entire arrangement) with high energy, and everything has built to this moment. On an acoustic instrument like this, physically adding more notes helps give you a larger, richer sound.

2) The point you may not be seeing about the "difficulty" appears if you approach it from a different angle. If I have the part written at m104 with both voices playing the triplets, that is definitely going to take more practice to play than if I had played it with only the RH. If I did it for m104 and not m108, the performer now has to learn how to play the same figure two different ways (which present their own difficulties, such as the syncopation that would arise). It's also kinder to the performer to keep it consistant: If you're going to make them practice that figure, at least let them play it more than once. d:

If you do decide to keep it as-is, I also want to confirm you moved the Bb in m108 LH from beat 2.5 to beat 2 intentionally? That sounds fine, I think.

Yes, that was an intentional simplification.

...That's what I said? You still have a Gb there. Just to be clear, I'm referring to m121 RH beat 4.5.

Sorry, I misread that as LH beat 4. Fixed.

- this makes sense, I'll respell them (what's the Finale shortcut for this?)

Not sure if there's a faster way, but I just highlight the chord(s), right click, transpose up/down chromatically a diminished second.

Glad you figured out what I meant by "beat 6" lol, looks good. I can't read 9/8 apparently...

Accepted