[MUL] Dark Souls - "Dark Sun Gwyndolin" by Libera

Started by Zeta, November 27, 2019, 05:28:30 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zeta

Submission Information:

Series: Other
Game: Dark Souls
Console: Multiplatform
Title: Dark Sun Gwyndolin
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Libera

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

Libera


mikey

sounds super good to me
if I'm nitpicking I would ask that you change the bpm to 60 for ocd purposes and tie the choir voice into measure 24, since that E is much more present than the C you currently have (just to clarify not saying to remove the C)
unmotivated

LeviR.star

Quote from: mikey on November 27, 2019, 06:13:22 PMif I'm nitpicking I would ask that you change the bpm to 60 for ocd purposes

I second this; it's only 1 bpm away from 60, which is a marked increment on most standard metronomes.
Check out my Youtube channel for remixes and original music! LeviR.star's Remixes

Also check out my piano arrangements here on my PA thread! LeviR.star's Arrangements

Libera

Quote from: mikey on November 27, 2019, 06:13:22 PMsounds super good to me

Thanks!  And thanks for giving it a look as well.

Quote from: mikey on November 27, 2019, 06:13:22 PMif I'm nitpicking I would ask that you change the bpm to 60 for ocd purposes
Quote from: LeviR.star on November 27, 2019, 06:24:47 PMI second this; it's only 1 bpm away from 60, which is a marked increment on most standard metronomes.

Digital metronomes generally do increments of 1 and it's easy enough to round off to 60 if your metronome can't do that.

Quote from: mikey on November 27, 2019, 06:13:22 PMtie the choir voice into measure 24, since that E is much more present than the C you currently have (just to clarify not saying to remove the C)

The singer pretty much comes off straight on beat 1 of bar 24 (and also 21, to compare) and it's just all reverb that you're hearing after that.  That's what I think anyway, and the way I've written it is the best way to reflect that.

Latios212

Quote from: mikey on November 27, 2019, 06:13:22 PMtie the choir voice into measure 24, since that E is much more present than the C you currently have (just to clarify not saying to remove the C)
Quote from: Libera on November 28, 2019, 03:28:22 AMThe singer pretty much comes off straight on beat 1 of bar 24 (and also 21, to compare) and it's just all reverb that you're hearing after that.  That's what I think anyway, and the way I've written it is the best way to reflect that.
I'm a bit conflicted; I can see where mikey's coming from. While I agree that the voice stops singing at beat 1, the way the sheet is written somewhat implies that the sound cuts off there instead of starts to die there. E.g. in m. 21 since there's nothing written it could be easily interpreted that you want to lift the pedal and have complete silence, whereas you want to let the sounds of the previous measure die out (similar for 24). Perhaps indicating precise pedaling for this piece would help eliminate any potential confusion?

Other things:
- In m. 10 I hear a C# in LH beat 1.5 and don't hear the E# on beat 3.
- Dynamics! Definitely think m. 10-12 are worthy of a cresc. and m. 13 should be noticeably softer. The rest as well begs some variation which I'll leave up to you.
- I'd definitely consider courtesy naturals on the top F's in m. 26/30 since unlike m. 7-8 this pitch changes.
- Beam beat 2 of m. 30 together?
- Are you sure about the G's in the chords in m. 34/36? They don't sound quite right 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 December 03, 2019, 04:28:20 PMI'm a bit conflicted; I can see where mikey's coming from. While I agree that the voice stops singing at beat 1, the way the sheet is written somewhat implies that the sound cuts off there instead of starts to die there. E.g. in m. 21 since there's nothing written it could be easily interpreted that you want to lift the pedal and have complete silence, whereas you want to let the sounds of the previous measure die out (similar for 24). Perhaps indicating precise pedaling for this piece would help eliminate any potential confusion?

Sure I can put the pedal markings in throughout.

Quote from: Latios212 on December 03, 2019, 04:28:20 PM- In m. 10 I hear a C# in LH beat 1.5 and don't hear the E# on beat 3.
- I'd definitely consider courtesy naturals on the top F's in m. 26/30 since unlike m. 7-8 this pitch changes.
- Beam beat 2 of m. 30 together?

All fixed.

Quote from: Latios212 on December 03, 2019, 04:28:20 PM- Are you sure about the G's in the chords in m. 34/36? They don't sound quite right to me...

I seem to remember hearing them when I wrote this out but on listening again I cannot hear them.  So, begone foul Gs.

Quote from: Latios212 on December 03, 2019, 04:28:20 PM- Dynamics! Definitely think m. 10-12 are worthy of a cresc. and m. 13 should be noticeably softer. The rest as well begs some variation which I'll leave up to you.

Yeah I don't really know how I feel about dynamics here.  There's a reason I just left the whole thing as pianissimo which is that actually there isn't really any dynamic variation throughout the piece from the individual parts.  There is an effect of dynamic variation (like at 13 as you pointed out) as the vocal part drops out just leaving the harpsichord(?) on it's own, but it's not like the harpsichord ever plays any quieter.  My intention with the piece was to meticulously indicate the melodic line with markings which gives the performer the necessary information to bring it out over the accompaniment while keeping everything to a low dynamic.  You pointed out the crescendo in 10-12, which sounds good in the original but there's barely anything to work with in the sheet to make a convincing crescendo.  I can think about it some more if you'd like, and I'm happy to hear further thoughts, but I feel like I've already spent a long time thinking about this.



Thanks for the feedback!  (New files are up.)

Latios212

Quote from: Libera on December 03, 2019, 05:11:20 PMYeah I don't really know how I feel about dynamics here.  There's a reason I just left the whole thing as pianissimo which is that actually there isn't really any dynamic variation throughout the piece from the individual parts.  There is an effect of dynamic variation (like at 13 as you pointed out) as the vocal part drops out just leaving the harpsichord(?) on it's own, but it's not like the harpsichord ever plays any quieter.  My intention with the piece was to meticulously indicate the melodic line with markings which gives the performer the necessary information to bring it out over the accompaniment while keeping everything to a low dynamic.  You pointed out the crescendo in 10-12, which sounds good in the original but there's barely anything to work with in the sheet to make a convincing crescendo.  I can think about it some more if you'd like, and I'm happy to hear further thoughts, but I feel like I've already spent a long time thinking about this.
That's fair. Mostly my intention was to point out that the sheet uses pp the entire time and doesn't point out any contrast between the vocal and instrumental parts which differ in volume. For example, the distinction between the mildly loud vocals in m. 1-12 vs. the quiet harp in m. 13+. I'd personally do something like mp at m. 1, crescendo to mf at 12, pp at 13, mp at 18. Though I agree you can't correlate the original and the piano arrangement exactly. All up to you.

(Last thing from me, could we respace the systems a bit to make more room for the pedal markings? Some places like above m. 11/37 are a bit tight.)
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

New files are up.  I did this:

Quote from: Latios212 on December 03, 2019, 05:26:32 PM(Last thing from me, could we respace the systems a bit to make more room for the pedal markings? Some places like above m. 11/37 are a bit tight.)

With regards to this,

Quote from: Latios212 on December 03, 2019, 05:26:32 PMThat's fair. Mostly my intention was to point out that the sheet uses pp the entire time and doesn't point out any contrast between the vocal and instrumental parts which differ in volume. For example, the distinction between the mildly loud vocals in m. 1-12 vs. the quiet harp in m. 13+. I'd personally do something like mp at m. 1, crescendo to mf at 12, pp at 13, mp at 18. Though I agree you can't correlate the original and the piano arrangement exactly. All up to you.

I hope it's alright if I just leave it as is for the reasons that I've already explained above.  I can see where you're coming from, but I just personally don't feel like it's the right approach to go with here.  Thanks for your input though!

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

Maelstrom

One single, small think. Is it possible to align all the ped markings together? Its bothering me as it is now

Libera

I'm not sure it is possible to line them all up together without having a lot of the pedal markings hanging awkwardly low below the staff.  I tried to line them up where it did work though, like on most of the second page.  That being said, if there are any of those you think could be better, let me know.

Maelstrom


Zeta

This submission has been accepted by Maelstrom.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot