I personally take issue with the manner in which D3ath gives feedback [...].
I'm sorry you feel that way, but I don't understand. Is it because I said "I'd have done this," instead of "I'd suggest doing this"? I didn't know it would make
that big of a difference. I assumed that saying it's what
I would have done should have been enough to avoid imposing these changes onto you. (I know this is a poor excuse, but English isn't my first language, so if there
is a huge difference in language register between the two forms, I wasn't aware of it.) I'm trying to compare my comment to Latios's, and aside from that (and the formatting—please use the proper BBCode list function REEEE), the only difference I can see is starting with "I love this song!", which frankly, isn't a sentiment I share. Your arrangement is well-done, but I don't find it necessary for others to say that to me, and I didn't find it necessary to say it to you.
I guess we have differences on what constitutes a good indication of character. I actually spend a lot of time on them for all my sheets, so generally speaking I'm very unlikely to want to change them.
I apologize, that comment about indication of character was my attempt at a joke, or small talk. I now understand how that might have offended you, and maybe you can see why I usually opt to be so serious and direct.
"I can see it working out," was a real understatement: it's very appropriate here—probably even more so than I realize, because I haven't played the game and therefore don't know the context. I can't say that's how I feel about
all such indications of yours, unfortunately.
I like to make it explicitly clear when and where I want pedal.
That's exactly why I don't understand why you use it, since
con pedale is basically the antithesis of precise pedal notation. I suppose that's not a problem for this sheet, since it's pretty clear that you have to change the pedal every measure and drop it when there's a rest, etc., but in another piece, it might not be so obvious. In any case, I think the arpeggio pattern already communicates the intended pedal usage clearly enough—seriously, I don't know anyone who'd play this kind of accompaniment without pedal. In all honesty, I don't know anyone who'd play any kind of piece without pedal, unless the writing is very contrapuntal and precise (and even there, it can still be used occasionally), or it's specifically written
senza pedale,
non legato, or something else to that effect.
For example, take the opening measures of "
Far Away". If I actually have to interpret that, there's no way I'm playing that without pedal: for measure 1, I'd lower the pedal along with the first note of each slur, and release it just before the second; for measures 2 and 3, I'd change the pedal every two beats, perhaps wiggling it a little at the end of measure 3 to lose a bit of the extra resonance and help with the
diminuendo. This allows for clear articulation while still getting that richness in sound the pedal offers, but it's obvious a simple
con pedale wouldn't suffice to indicate this. The way I see it, the pedal usage of this type requires one of two courses of action: either notating it precisely (which can get really tedious, but is necessary sometimes), or notating nothing at all and letting other interprets come up with their own solution (which is what I usually go with).
You can keep the
con pedale if you disagree, but this is why I don't like it: it's superfluous if the pedal usage is simple and intuitive, and it's useless if the pedal usage is more complex.
If it was more to the right then it would have been too close to the accidentals for my liking. I hadn't considered adding extra space at the start of the bar, which is what I ended up doing.
Honestly, this was a dumb suggestion on my part, because it really wouldn't have made much of a difference. I hadn't thought of tinkering with measure length either.
I don't like writing in articulations over pedal because in my opinion they don't make a whole lot of sense.
I see it more of a typographical convention than a true articulation, but I've seen unslurred grace notes in a couple professional sheets—even in
senza pedale sections—, so it's not a big deal.
Articulations can still be useful even with pedal for indicating the type of attack you want, however, as that still has an effect on the sound.
The courtesy accidental is something that could be added, but I tend to err on the side of not adding them in if I don't think it's really necessary.
I don't understand this either, because I
relish placing courtesy accidentals, and you also seemed to favour utmost clarity in your sheets. Sure, sometimes it's rather obvious (it's clear that the G in measure 43 is part of a chromatic descent, so it'd be strange to have a second G#), but taking measure 8 for example, I
have seen sheets where a low Gb like that would mean all other Gs in the measure were flat as well, regardless of height.
There definitely isn't an Eb in this chord, but this was probably just an accident on your part and you meant an En.
Yea, for some reason I thought the key was Bb major. I thought about editing it, but I saw you had already replied, and I didn't want there to be inconsistencies between my comment and your quoted text.
Author
Topic: [3DS] Fire Emblem Echoes: Shadows of Valentia - "The Voice That Calls You" by Libera (Read 1997 times)