[Wii] Metroid Prime 3: Corruption - "Title Screen" (Replacement) by Maelstrom

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Metroid
Game: Metroid Prime 3: Corruption
Console: Wii
Title: Title Screen
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Maelstrom


Replacement Information:
Links to Existing Sheet: MUS | MIDI | PDF
Replacement Type: Challenge (new arranger)

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Maelstrom]

[Libera]

I think this piece may have been the first VGM music I ever learnt to play on piano, when I was around 12.  I think I learnt it from so youtube video of someone playing it on piano and copying what they were doing haha.  Wow that was a long time ago.  Let's get a decent sheet of it on site!

-I'm not completely sure about the rhythms in 5-6/9-10, but it feels like it should be some sort of polyrhythm.  I'm also not convinced that these two rhythms are the same, the top note in bar 10 sounds like it starts much sooner than the corresponding note in bar 8 and I'm not even sure I can hear the A at all on beat 1 of bar 10.
-In the above comment I used your pitches for bars 9-10, but they should really all be a step lower e.g. starting and ending on an A, not a B.
-The octaves in the left hand in 5-12 feel like overkill to me.  The original still just has a single voice on that lower line and the texture it still pretty light and sparse all the way up until 13.  I think it'd be better to bring the octaves in there, where the original gets heavier.
-I'm not sure about the metric modulation going into 13.  The percussion is certainly still going on in 12/8 and one of the harmony parts (synths, strings? not sure) sounds like it may still be in 12/8 there as well.  I guess if it's not making it into the sheet it doesn't really matter, but it still feels somewhat disingenuous.  You could try including some of the triplet stuff into the left hand if you wanted to (though that might not sound particularly... stoic?)
-The horn feels prominent enough to include in 29-30/33-34, but maybe you tried and it sounded bad.
-The lack of the C in bar 20 resolving to the B feels a bit underwhelming.  Maybe you could just throw a B onto the E octave, just for bars 21-22?
-Does this not repeat on the title screen?  I thought it did.
-Do we really need the accent on every group of three notes on the first page?  For one thing, I think it's already kind of implied by the time signature, but you could also just write 'sim' after the first 3-4 bars.

I hope that helps.

[Maelstrom]

wow, it's
been a while, hasn't it.

Alright, liked your suggestions. Removed the A in m10 b1. It may be a weird polyrhythm, but I remember poking this every possible way when I initially arranged it. If you've got specific suggestions on how it can be improved, I'm all ears.

I never actually played the OG version (only prime trilogy) so I had no clue if it looped. YT footage didn't exist, so I grabbed a "back up copy" and it seems like it cleanly loops to m1 so that's what I did.

Left the time sig as is. I think it's easier to read this way, and incorporating the percussion feels a bit distracting and hard to play quietly without disrupting the feel of the rest of the voices. I'm satisfied with it as-is.

Everything else fixed

[Libera]

wow, it's
been a while, hasn't it.

I guess so... Glad to see you back!

Alright, liked your suggestions. Removed the A in m10 b1. It may be a weird polyrhythm, but I remember poking this every possible way when I initially arranged it. If you've got specific suggestions on how it can be improved, I'm all ears.

So it's also been a long time since I looked at this section.  Here's a picture that isn't really necessary but includes the stuff I'm talking about below:

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

I feel like the rhythm is actually pretty good overall.  The only thing that stands out to me is the A on in bar 10.  It sounds like it comes in just a little too late in comparison to the original (i.e. in the original it comes in earlier than in bar 8).  My suggestion is to put it a sixteenth earlier.  I've also written in the G that I told you to get rid of last time (it was an A in my previous feedback).  I still don't know whether it is there or not in the original, but maybe it makes sense to include to mirror the phrase in bar 5-6?  I'm on the fence on this one.

Otherwise the edits look great.  The only other comments I have are:
-I feel like C# and D# would make more sense accidental wise for the horn in 29+, based on the key signature.
-You could put the eighth rest at usual height in bar 11.
-In general the dynamics could be a aligned a little more carefully, horizontally and vertically.  Particularly the mf in bar 5, but really all of them could do with adjusting.

[Libera]

You know it's been a long time when you get the necrobump warning.

After being asked to a while ago, I've finally got around to making the above edits myself.  I shall approve!

[Latios212]

wow, it has been a while

This looks good overall! One small thing before we get to those rhythms: the last dyad in m. 2 should be D-A (stepping down to the next measure).

Now, about those high vocal melodies - I'm not familiar with this track but I feel like the timing is loose here, and in a couple of places the sheet looks like it prioritizes precision over sensibility. Here's what I think I'd tentatively suggest, after having listened to it for a bit:

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

- m. 5: The last couple of notes sound more to me like they should fit the 12/8 rhythm. Regardless, the half note should be split up here since we're in 12/8.
- m. 6: I agree with the rhythm but I think it'd be much easier to read as a duplet.
- m. 7: I agree with the rhythm here but again the half note needs to be split since we're in 12/8.
- m. 8: This is missing the F# resolution of the previous line
- m. 9-10: This I'm the least sure about but this is what I feel it should be with the F# and A cleanly lining up with eighth note beats in the accompaniment. But not really confident about it given the different pattern of stresses in m. 5-6.

Some of these aren't prescriptive of course, but that's my take on it. Lemme know what you (Maelstrom and/or Libera I guess?) agree/disagree with!

[Maelstrom]

Did a mix of changes and no changes for page one.
-Changed m2
-I think the emphasis of the weird disordering in m5 is valuable and kept it, but changed m6 because I had previously forgot duplets exist
-Split all half notes oops
-I genuinely can't hear an F# in m8 melody line at all. I hear it resolving from the G straight down to the D......
-M9-10 is infuriating. Libera previously pointed out that the returning G you notated as the last note of m9 is something you expect to be there, but isn't when you slow it down and listen carefully. I had previously agreed, but as I'm writing this just now I mapped out all the beats in the measures (and equally spaced the markers to ensure accuracy) and it's right there. It's something like a triplet 16th after the barline but I think it may be safe just to notate it like m9-10. Would like to hear from libera again on this since it's a reversion from his previous suggestion.
Here it is mapped out. The first 2 lines after the measure are the G and then the E and the ones after it are perfectly evenly spaced beat markers.

It comes in slightly before the strings, but I think notating it like m6 might be clearest to the performer who probably doesn't care if the notes are a millisecond off.
Since this is a reversion, I'd like libera's take on this again.

files updated

[Latios212]

-I genuinely can't hear an F# in m8 melody line at all. I hear it resolving from the G straight down to the D......

I still hear this...

-M9-10 is infuriating. Libera previously pointed out that the returning G you notated as the last note of m9 is something you expect to be there, but isn't when you slow it down and listen carefully. I had previously agreed, but as I'm writing this just now I mapped out all the beats in the measures (and equally spaced the markers to ensure accuracy) and it's right there. It's something like a triplet 16th after the barline but I think it may be safe just to notate it like m9-10. Would like to hear from libera again on this since it's a reversion from his previous suggestion.
Here it is mapped out. The first 2 lines after the measure are the G and then the E and the ones after it are perfectly evenly spaced beat markers.

It comes in slightly before the strings, but I think notating it like m6 might be clearest to the performer who probably doesn't care if the notes are a millisecond off.
Since this is a reversion, I'd like libera's take on this again.

I do think that the part notated as a duplet sounds different enough from m. 6 to be worth notating differently. But I'll be honest I don't have too good a grasp of what's going on in this part so I'll leave it up to your judgement - whatever you feel is right.

I'll wait for Libera's input as well before accepting!

[Libera]

I feel like the A comes in too late now in bar 10.  Everything else is fine.

Although I do now notice that I think the bass actually goes to a D on beat 12 of bar 6 (just before the C in the following bar).  Not super clear, but it seems right to me.  Also, is the C rearticulated on beat 7 of bar 3?  It kind of sounds like it to me.

[Maelstrom]

Although I do now notice that I think the bass actually goes to a D on beat 12 of bar 6 (just before the C in the following bar).  Not super clear, but it seems right to me.  Also, is the C rearticulated on beat 7 of bar 3?  It kind of sounds like it to me.

I can't hear anything in there and would prefer to leave it as is, since that's the simplest way of putting it, imo

Fixed m10, I think everyone will be fine with it now

I still don't know what you're going on about latios, I can't hear that F# and certainly not any vocal harmonies there.......

[Libera]

Sure, I'll approve.

[Latios212]

Alrighty, I don't have anything else to add! Let's get this accepted at last~

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Latios212.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot