News:

Be sure to tell your friends about NinSheetMusic!

Main Menu

[Wii] Xenoblade Chronicles - "Gaur Plain" by Libera

Started by Zeta, September 04, 2019, 03:50:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zeta

Submission Information:

Series: Xeno
Game: Xenoblade Chronicles
Console: Nintendo Wii
Title: Gaur Plain
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Libera

[attachment deleted by admin]

Libera

It's borderline criminal that we don't have a sheet for this on-site yet.


Latios212

My arrangements and YouTube channel!

Quote from: Dudeman on February 22, 2016, 10:16:37 AM
who needs education when you can have WAIFUS!!!!!

Spoiler
[close]
turtle

Latios212

Splendid sheet! Keeps it straightforward while maintaining the essence of the piece. Only a handful of small things to add.
- I think the layer 2 melody on beat 3 of measure 8/49 is important (the D above). I get that it's important to have the previous phrase end on the A but that's what I'd recommend.
- Last bass note in m. 22/61 sounds like a higher D instead of A
- For the second chord in m. 24 and first in 25 (and subsequent places) I think it would sound better and a bit fuller if you inverted downwards a bit to avoid the major second below the melody.
- Quarter rest in m. 36/75 could be lowered a bit
- Would suggest clef changes for beat 4 of m. 39 and 43 (RH) to lead into the subsequent phrases better
- Articulations on wrong side of the note in m. 47 beats 1-2 RH
- LH of m. 53 sounds like there's a 16th note F at the end leading into the next measure
- LH of m. 65/73 sounds like there's an An on beat 4
- LH of m. 69 sounds like the G on beat 2 should be an octave lower
- I think you should continue splitting layers in m. 69 beats 1-2. It's odd for it to suddenly combine with the top layer even though it matches that part's contour
- Similarly I think m. 71-73 could use a bit more consistency in the layering. You have half rests under beats 1-2 unlike previous places and a hidden rest in m. 73 but layer 1 still flipped upwards
- m. 86 is missing the beat 4 pickup to m. 87
- RH misaligned beat 1 in m. 88/92
- Any particular reason the LH arpeggios in m. 95+ are an octave lower than in the original? It's fine if you want it that way, but I think it adds a significant weight into the arrangement whereas in the original I view this section as a much lighter-sounding interlude in contrast to the rest of the song being particularly "heavy".
- RH in m. 96 all sounds like dyads to me?
- m. 97-98 - last LH note sounds like it should be G instead of F
- I feel like you could make m. 109-111/113-115 a bit more interesting by varying the octave of the left hand. Perhaps something like low-low-high-low-low-high to try and preserve a bit of what the original percussion insinuates?
- Can we include the Eb in the chord in m. 113/115? The way it's written now makes it sound like it's a relatively empty suspended chord instead of a Cm9.
My arrangements and YouTube channel!

Quote from: Dudeman on February 22, 2016, 10:16:37 AM
who needs education when you can have WAIFUS!!!!!

Spoiler
[close]
turtle

Libera

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- For the second chord in m. 24 and first in 25 (and subsequent places) I think it would sound better and a bit fuller if you inverted downwards a bit to avoid the major second below the melody.

I sort of understand, but changing the voicings here would mean that the harmonies can't be easily sustained without pedal and also it sounds a lot flatter having the second layer stay constant.  I'd prefer to keep it as it is, basically.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- Would suggest clef changes for beat 4 of m. 39 and 43 (RH) to lead into the subsequent phrases better

Sure for 39, but I think 43 is preferable as it is.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- LH of m. 69 sounds like the G on beat 2 should be an octave lower

On listening again I'm not 100% sure, but the low bass sound definitely comes in on beat 2.5 rather than beat 2 and so no matter what is exactly going on, I think it'd be better to keep it as is.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- I think you should continue splitting layers in m. 69 beats 1-2. It's odd for it to suddenly combine with the top layer even though it matches that part's contour
- Similarly I think m. 71-73 could use a bit more consistency in the layering. You have half rests under beats 1-2 unlike previous places and a hidden rest in m. 73 but layer 1 still flipped upwards

I think everything should be consistent now and notes should be flipped correctly.  Let me know if I've missed something though.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- Any particular reason the LH arpeggios in m. 95+ are an octave lower than in the original? It's fine if you want it that way, but I think it adds a significant weight into the arrangement whereas in the original I view this section as a much lighter-sounding interlude in contrast to the rest of the song being particularly "heavy".

I think I was just worried about it crossing over too much with the right hand, but it's actually not really that bad so I've moved it up.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- I feel like you could make m. 109-111/113-115 a bit more interesting by varying the octave of the left hand. Perhaps something like low-low-high-low-low-high to try and preserve a bit of what the original percussion insinuates?

I kind of see why you might write something like that, but I think I'd prefer to stick to the more prominent bass-line here.

Everything else should have been fixed.  Thanks for checking!

Latios212

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- For the second chord in m. 24 and first in 25 (and subsequent places) I think it would sound better and a bit fuller if you inverted downwards a bit to avoid the major second below the melody.
Quote from: Libera on September 17, 2019, 12:56:10 PMI sort of understand, but changing the voicings here would mean that the harmonies can't be easily sustained without pedal and also it sounds a lot flatter having the second layer stay constant.  I'd prefer to keep it as it is, basically.
Makes sense for 24. For 25 and similar I still think it could benefit from including the Ab in the chord, but your choice.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- I think you should continue splitting layers in m. 69 beats 1-2. It's odd for it to suddenly combine with the top layer even though it matches that part's contour
- Similarly I think m. 71-73 could use a bit more consistency in the layering. You have half rests under beats 1-2 unlike previous places and a hidden rest in m. 73 but layer 1 still flipped upwards
Quote from: Libera on September 17, 2019, 12:56:10 PMI think everything should be consistent now and notes should be flipped correctly.  Let me know if I've missed something though.
71-73 look good and 69 better but I'd still suggest separating out the layers in 69. Not a huge deal though.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 16, 2019, 05:09:41 PM- m. 97-98 - last LH note sounds like it should be G instead of F
Sorry - I meant the last note in each phrase not just the last note in the measure.

Everything else looks good to me!
My arrangements and YouTube channel!

Quote from: Dudeman on February 22, 2016, 10:16:37 AM
who needs education when you can have WAIFUS!!!!!

Spoiler
[close]
turtle

Libera

Quote from: Latios212 on September 17, 2019, 03:41:33 PMMakes sense for 24. For 25 and similar I still think it could benefit from including the Ab in the chord, but your choice.

I think it's more consistent to keep to three notes in each chord here.  The harmony is still all there because the Ab is in the bass.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 17, 2019, 03:41:33 PM71-73 look good and 69 better but I'd still suggest separating out the layers in 69. Not a huge deal though.

Ok I've changed 69.

Quote from: Latios212 on September 17, 2019, 03:41:33 PMSorry - I meant the last note in each phrase not just the last note in the measure.

Strangely enough I hear an F on beat 2.75 in bar 97 but a G on beat 2.75 in bar 98.

New files are up.

Latios212

My arrangements and YouTube channel!

Quote from: Dudeman on February 22, 2016, 10:16:37 AM
who needs education when you can have WAIFUS!!!!!

Spoiler
[close]
turtle

mastersuperfan

#8
I feel like the first four measures are missing some of the rhythmic "punch" in the original. Have you considered something like the following?

Image
[close]

I don't really understand the layering in m8 and m47. Is there any particular reason why Layer 2 can't be flipped upwards and Layer 1 downwards so that they don't look so awkwardly clustered on beat 3?

m11 and m19, RH: I get what you're trying to do here with the two layers, keeping Layer 1 held while Layer 2 plays. However, with the rests hidden and Layer 1 flipped upwards, the sheet looks like the whole measure consists of only one layer, which would inevitably confuse some players as to how you seemingly managed to fit 5 beats into a single measure. I would either show the Layer 2 rests, or merge them into a single layer and cut the dotted half note a beat short. (You show the rests in m50, for instance.)

I'm not sure I understand the intentions of the slurs on RH beat 4 in m27, m31, m35, etc. The entire melody feels very legato and connected, the ascending eighth notes not moreso than any others—I would be tempted to just put a legato indication for the right hand at the beginning of m24, actually. If you do feel strongly about keeping those slurs in particular, I would be inclined to at least extend them into the next measure to the note they're actually leading to.

There's a parallel harmony line for the eighth notes in Layer on beats 3-4 of m35, RH, that you might consider adding in order to distinguish m35 from m27.

I would suggest turning beat 3 of RH m36 Layer 2 (the G) into a half note. It sounds held to me, and it would also make it clearer that the 16th notes at the end of the measure belong to Layer 1, not Layer 2. (Same goes for m75.)

In m37 RH, the Layer 1 half note stem between the note and the dot in Layer 2 looks a little awkward to me; I would suggest offsetting the two layers horizontally a bit.

Pianistically, I think it would be nice to have a poco a poco crescendo from m99-108, instead of the crescendo only in m108. Given that the right hand is just holding chords (and held piano notes are less interesting than sustained notes on other instruments), I think that having a gradual buildup would do a lot to make the phrase more engaging and powerful.

This is what I'm hearing for the RH in m112:

Image
[close]

I also think that having articulations (slurs and staccatos) on the RH in m111-112 would be helpful, considering that not all these eighth and sixteenth notes are articulated the same way (there are distinctly connected or shortened notes in there).

In the last two measures (m115-116), none of the notes sound staccato or shortened to me except beat 1 of m116.

Very much looking forward to seeing this one on the site!

EDIT: Oh, also, this might just be me, but the tempo marking feels like it's a little bit too far to the left. This is really up to preference, though.
Quote from: NocturneOfShadow on February 11, 2016, 03:00:36 PMthere's also a huge difference in quality between 2000 songs and 2010 songs
Quote from: Latios212 on February 11, 2016, 03:29:24 PMThe difference between 2000 songs and 2010 songs is 10 songs.

Libera

Thanks for having a look.  I've put up new files with some edits concerning your feedback.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMI feel like the first four measures are missing some of the rhythmic "punch" in the original. Have you considered something like the following?

Image
[close]

Sorry but I don't really see the value in this at all.  It sacrifices any semblance to the actual bassline and is quite awkward to play.  My version picks out the strong beats from the percussion while keeping the bass movement intact, which is how I think it's best to go here.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMI don't really understand the layering in m8 and m47. Is there any particular reason why Layer 2 can't be flipped upwards and Layer 1 downwards so that they don't look so awkwardly clustered on beat 3?

It's a holdover from when there was no D in the run at the end.  As you say, it makes more sense to flip the layers now, so I've done it.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMm11 and m19, RH: I get what you're trying to do here with the two layers, keeping Layer 1 held while Layer 2 plays. However, with the rests hidden and Layer 1 flipped upwards, the sheet looks like the whole measure consists of only one layer, which would inevitably confuse some players as to how you seemingly managed to fit 5 beats into a single measure. I would either show the Layer 2 rests, or merge them into a single layer and cut the dotted half note a beat short. (You show the rests in m50, for instance.)

I've merged them into one layer.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMI'm not sure I understand the intentions of the slurs on RH beat 4 in m27, m31, m35, etc. The entire melody feels very legato and connected, the ascending eighth notes not moreso than any others—I would be tempted to just put a legato indication for the right hand at the beginning of m24, actually. If you do feel strongly about keeping those slurs in particular, I would be inclined to at least extend them into the next measure to the note they're actually leading to.

I'm more pointing out the notes I think I most important to be slurred.  At any rate, I've extended them one note each as you suggested.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMThere's a parallel harmony line for the eighth notes in Layer on beats 3-4 of m35, RH, that you might consider adding in order to distinguish m35 from m27.

Good idea, it matches up nicely with 66/74 that way as well.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMI would suggest turning beat 3 of RH m36 Layer 2 (the G) into a half note. It sounds held to me, and it would also make it clearer that the 16th notes at the end of the measure belong to Layer 1, not Layer 2. (Same goes for m75.)

I changed it to how I handled bar 67 as that better reflects how it should be played in practice.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMIn m37 RH, the Layer 1 half note stem between the note and the dot in Layer 2 looks a little awkward to me; I would suggest offsetting the two layers horizontally a bit.

I honestly think it looks less confusing now than it does after sufficient horizontal offsetting to get both the head and the dot on one side.  I also don't think it looks really that awkward at the moment, personally.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMPianistically, I think it would be nice to have a poco a poco crescendo from m99-108, instead of the crescendo only in m108. Given that the right hand is just holding chords (and held piano notes are less interesting than sustained notes on other instruments), I think that having a gradual buildup would do a lot to make the phrase more engaging and powerful.

This is another thing that I'm going to respectfully pass on if that's alright with you.  If a performer wants to play it like that then fair enough, but I'm not going to suggest it.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMThis is what I'm hearing for the RH in m112:

Nice catch.  Fixed.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMI also think that having articulations (slurs and staccatos) on the RH in m111-112 would be helpful, considering that not all these eighth and sixteenth notes are articulated the same way (there are distinctly connected or shortened notes in there).

As much as other people have tried to convince me otherwise, I still greatly dislike articulations under pedal and I'm not going to put them in my sheets, sorry.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMIn the last two measures (m115-116), none of the notes sound staccato or shortened to me except beat 1 of m116.

I've changed it a bit, but not completely.  Something I should point out is that the note lengths in 116 are not only representing the strings, but also trying to get across the sudden three hits from the drums.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMEDIT: Oh, also, this might just be me, but the tempo marking feels like it's a little bit too far to the left. This is really up to preference, though.

I think my preference is to keep it where it is, if that's alright.

Quote from: mastersuperfan on September 17, 2019, 07:09:43 PMI feel like the first four measures are missing some of the rhythmic "punch" in the original. Have you considered something like the following?

Image
[close]
Very much looking forward to seeing this one on the site!

I'm glad to hear it!  Thanks again for the help.

Static

This is a solid arrangement. It's really impressive to me how you managed to capture such a complex and rhythmic sound into a relatively simple piano sheet; it all just works really well.

The only thing I would really change at this point is to make the 2nd layer Bbs in m80, 84, 88, and 92 Gbs instead. The Eb minor chords in this section really give it a more darker and dissonant feel (particularly between the Gb and F). Leaving the Gb out loses that effect entirely because the chords are ambiguous.

Libera

Quote from: Static on September 21, 2019, 04:13:06 PMThe only thing I would really change at this point is to make the 2nd layer Bbs in m80, 84, 88, and 92 Gbs instead. The Eb minor chords in this section really give it a more darker and dissonant feel (particularly between the Gb and F). Leaving the Gb out loses that effect entirely because the chords are ambiguous.

Good idea, I've put up new files with this change in mind.

Quote from: Static on September 21, 2019, 04:13:06 PMThis is a solid arrangement. It's really impressive to me how you managed to capture such a complex and rhythmic sound into a relatively simple piano sheet; it all just works really well.

Thanks!  I'm glad it turned out well in the end.

Static


Zeta

This submission has been accepted by Static.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot