[NDS] Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth 2 - "Hakari Mikagami ~ Goddess of Law" by Trasdeg

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Ace Attorney
Game: Ace Attorney Investigations: Miles Edgeworth 2
Console: Nintendo DS
Title: Hakari Mikagami ~ Goddess of Law
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Trasdegi

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Trasdegi]

[mastersuperfan]

*sniffs* is that Ace Attorney I smell

the first thing I do when I open the sheet

[close]

Some things I noticed:

• In m3-8, I think it would be better to drop the dots from the notes with staccato (I think this topic come up in discussions before). Not only would that keep the note lengths consistent between all the different staccato'd notes in the same measure (since some of them are just eighth notes), the dots just make the first few measures look unnecessarily cluttered, IMO.
• Of course, still keep the dots in m9-10 since there aren't staccatos there. But I think those ones could use some accents, or at the least tenutos, because I think they are emphasized more than the notes in the previous measures with staccatos.
• I think m16-17 could use a crescendo.
• The left hand looks unplayable in m19; I'd suggest a tremolo instead of the really fast octaves.
• It sounds like the melody is being doubled in octaves in m20-21; I would suggest adding that extra lower octave on top of what you already have, to have it preserve the mood of the original track and feel less empty.
• The original track has a constant triplet rhythm going on that's sorely missing in m23. I think this measure probably needs to be re-transcribed.
• The way m24 is set up makes sense, but... I still wonder if there's a way to notate it so you don't have to change the time signature. Maybe you could only put the first fermata (the one on the chord) on the last beat on a 4/4 measure and then start a new 4/4 measure that's mostly empty except for the pickups at the end. I'm not sure if that would be better.
• I think (am not sure) that you should split the LH half note in m24 into two tied quarters and put a fermata on the second one to line up with the RH?
• I would tie the LH whole notes in m25 and m30 over to the next measure.
• Maybe try putting a caesura at the end of the piece before the repeat, since the original track pauses before it loops as well?
• I wonder if there's a way to incorporate the use of pedal in this arrangement, to simulate the heavy feel of the organ that the piano is missing. I'm not sure how well it'll work, though, especially with all the runs. At the least, you could definitely use it in m18-19. Also m1-2, the middle of m24, and m31, but considering those are just held notes already I'm not sure how much of a difference it even makes.

Nice job with this sheet! I really like this theme, and, especially with your incorporation of the percussion into the left hand, I really think you've done it justice. heh heh heh heh

[Trasdegi]

Some things I noticed:

• In m3-8, I think it would be better to drop the dots from the notes with staccato (I think this topic come up in discussions before). Not only would that keep the note lengths consistent between all the different staccato'd notes in the same measure (since some of them are just eighth notes), the dots just make the first few measures look unnecessarily cluttered, IMO.
• Of course, still keep the dots in m9-10 since there aren't staccatos there. But I think those ones could use some accents, or at the least tenutos, because I think they are emphasized more than the notes in the previous measures with staccatos.
• I think m16-17 could use a crescendo.
• The left hand looks unplayable in m19; I'd suggest a tremolo instead of the really fast octaves.
• It sounds like the melody is being doubled in octaves in m20-21; I would suggest adding that extra lower octave on top of what you already have, to have it preserve the mood of the original track and feel less empty.
• The original track has a constant triplet rhythm going on that's sorely missing in m23. I think this measure probably needs to be re-transcribed.
• The way m24 is set up makes sense, but... I still wonder if there's a way to notate it so you don't have to change the time signature. Maybe you could only put the first fermata (the one on the chord) on the last beat on a 4/4 measure and then start a new 4/4 measure that's mostly empty except for the pickups at the end. I'm not sure if that would be better.
• I think (am not sure) that you should split the LH half note in m24 into two tied quarters and put a fermata on the second one to line up with the RH?
• I would tie the LH whole notes in m25 and m30 over to the next measure.
• Maybe try putting a caesura at the end of the piece before the repeat, since the original track pauses before it loops as well?
• I wonder if there's a way to incorporate the use of pedal in this arrangement, to simulate the heavy feel of the organ that the piano is missing. I'm not sure how well it'll work, though, especially with all the runs. At the least, you could definitely use it in m18-19. Also m1-2, the middle of m24, and m31, but considering those are just held notes already I'm not sure how much of a difference it even makes.

Nice job with this sheet! I really like this theme, and, especially with your incorporation of the percussion into the left hand, I really think you've done it justice. heh heh heh heh

- Tried it, and the 16th rests that appear make it even more cluttered imo.
- Done.
- Done.
- Tried it, but I found no way to have a tremolo with a fortepiano and a crescendo. I'll ask someone with a fuller version of Finale to do it.
- Done.
- Redone m.23.
- Redone m.24.
- Done.
- Done.
- Done.
- I think having pedal markings, but only on 2 measures would be a bit strange (as in that would imply not to use the pedal anywhere else). I usually prefer to leave pedal usage up to the performer.

[Trasdegi]

Updated again...

Changes made:
- Replaced the Ds naturals with Es double-flats in m.14
- Removed the upper octave in m. 19's 2nd half. That should do the trick for playability.
- After thinking about it, I removed the upper octave in m. 20-21. Even if it help it fell less empty, that nreaks the progression IMO.

[AmpharosAndy]

Spelling and stuff is all good now but the pdf looks rather off. Wonky n squished

bar 10 shove the f and c chord together as a chord in the left hand bc you can't even reach that with the rh boiiiiii and why would you do that anywayyyyyyy boioiiii

with bar 19 I wouldn't bother with writing out the 6s because nobody is going to play that. Save a lot of time and space by just putting a tremolo innit bc the length of the bar will still be the same and people know what it sounds like yeh. Plus bars 18 and 19 being 2/4 and 5/4 after a 3/4 passage = just leave it as two 3/4 bars with the chord held over m8. Don't overpoop it yeh.

get

[Trasdegi]

Spelling and stuff is all good now but the pdf looks rather off. Wonky n squished

Edited margins & spacing. Is this better?

bar 10 shove the f and c chord together as a chord in the left hand bc you can't even reach that with the rh boiiiiii and why would you do that anywayyyyyyy boioiiii

Done booiiiii And i did that because it's a very old arrangement and i didnt know what to do back then boioioioiiioioi

with bar 19 I wouldn't bother with writing out the 6s because nobody is going to play that. Save a lot of time and space by just putting a tremolo innit bc the length of the bar will still be the same and people know what it sounds like yeh.

Well, I already tried that, and I never got it to be as good as what I currently have...

Plus bars 18 and 19 being 2/4 and 5/4 after a 3/4 passage = just leave it as two 3/4 bars with the chord held over m8.

2 + 5 = 7 != 6 = 2 * 3 m8


Files Updated.

[Latios212]

Edited margins & spacing. Is this better?

Not quite, the measure distribution and layout leave a lot to be desired... let us know if you need help with that

[Trasdegi]

Thinkered with layout again.

[Brassman388]

Very Bach.

Seems like whenever you have a piece of music that slightly even resembles organ it's almost mandatory to do that fugue figure thing towards the end.

Anyways. The only gripes that I have is the lack of rests in the second layer from measure 5 thru 9, and the placement of the caesura in the last measure. I'm used to seeing it on the top, or second to top line towards the end of the bar.

That's all I got. Other opinions regarding the caesura would be great.

[Trasdegi]

Anyways. The only gripes that I have is the lack of rests in the second layer from measure 5 thru 9, and the placement of the caesura in the last measure. I'm used to seeing it on the top, or second to top line towards the end of the bar.

Fixed both things. The missing rests are from that time when I didn't understand how to properly use layers, and the caesura was just the default placement. I also always saw it at the end of the bar.

[Latios212]

Caesura looks alright, I think.

Other comments:
- Flip the tie between m. 1-2.
- Though it's chromatically descending here, m. 14 should use D naturals since it's a Bb major chord. Resultantly add courtesy D flats in the following measure.
- Disconnect the beams around the sextuplets in m. 19.
- Space the staves further apart at m. 22.
- Move the top fermata in in m. 24.
- Fix the page 2 number to be in the corner of the page and remove the page 2 URL.

• In m3-8, I think it would be better to drop the dots from the notes with staccato (I think this topic come up in discussions before). Not only would that keep the note lengths consistent between all the different staccato'd notes in the same measure (since some of them are just eighth notes), the dots just make the first few measures look unnecessarily cluttered, IMO.

This too, to make it more accurate.

[Trasdegi]

Caesura looks alright, I think.

Other comments:
- Flip the tie between m. 1-2.
- Though it's chromatically descending here, m. 14 should use D naturals since it's a Bb major chord. Resultantly add courtesy D flats in the following measure.
- Disconnect the beams around the sextuplets in m. 19.
- Space the staves further apart at m. 22.
- Move the top fermata in in m. 24.
- Fix the page 2 number to be in the corner of the page and remove the page 2 URL.
This too, to make it more accurate.

-Done.
-Done.
-Done.
-Done.
-Moved it down a bit
-Done
-Well, I think it's easier to read it as is - so I would prefer to keep it like that.

Files updated.

[Libera]

In m3-8, I think it would be better to drop the dots from the notes with staccato (I think this topic come up in discussions before). Not only would that keep the note lengths consistent between all the different staccato'd notes in the same measure (since some of them are just eighth notes), the dots just make the first few measures look unnecessarily cluttered, IMO.

Thirded.  I think I agree with you though on the cluttering aspect as both versions add on ink but the rests probably add more.  My reasoning for saying you should change this is because at the moment I would say that it is confusing to the reader.  The dot and the staccato are working in opposite directions and so the note length that it looks like it's trying to get the performer to play is hard to work out when in actuality you want exactly the same note length as the other staccato quavers.  Slightly more ink but I feel like it conveys what the performer has to do much more clearly.

[Trasdegi]

it is confusing to the reader.

But having an eighth-16th rest-16th confuses the reader even more IMO. It makes it look like that's a hard rythm figure and you have to count a rest, when it's a classic dotted eighth-16th figure.

The dot and the staccato are working in opposite directions

They are not, because articulation =/= note length. For me staccato marks the way you should play it, not a fixed note length. In some pieces, you'll play staccatos shorter than in other pieces, depending of what feels you want to convey.