[SW] Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury - "Crisp Climb Castle" by ManOfDucks

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Super Mario
Game: Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury
Console: Nintendo Switch
Title: Crisp Climb Castle
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: ManOfDucks

[attachment deleted by admin]

[ManOfDucks]

[ManOfDucks]

Here are a couple things I caught myself that I was unsure what to do with, it'd be great if I could get a second opinion.

-First 3 measures: I was unsure whether to write it like this in 2/4, or possible write it in 3/4, and then have a metric modulation into the fourth measure of Dotted Quarter = Quarter. Was wondering if anybody had thoughts on this.

-There are a couple spots where the bass pizzicatos and the bassoon have different notes on the downbeat (measures 7, 22, and other places where that bass part is repeated). I think it sounds fine in the recording, but when it's on the piano it just randomly sounds like a fifth and an octave in the bass. I was thinking about possibly removing either the bass pizz notes or the bassoon notes, but couldn't decide which. I think the bassoon notes are more prominent in the recording, but the bass pizz notes are lower pitched, so I could see either being a good choice. I was wondering if anybody could weigh in on this.

-I was also unsure on what NSM's philosophy on writing key signatures for modes was. Should I write the key signature of D major to use the least amount of accidentals, or should I use the key signature of E minor since Dorian is a minor mode?

-Measures 48-49 I can't tell if the notes I have written on LH counts 2&3 are actually being played or if my ear is just making them up, I could use a second opinion!

-Measures 32-51 I was unsure what the standard notation was for stem direction and note placement when there are so many overlapping voices. I tried to keep the strings stem up and the clarinet and oboe stems down (wasn't sure about measure 33 since I only have the string parts written there, should the stems be down like they normally would be, or up to stay consistent with the rest of the line?). From what I've read, stems down notes are supposed to go on the left and stem up notes should go on the right when voices overlap, but I'm not super happy with the way it looks right now and was wondering if anybody had some suggestions for this spot.

-Measure 37 beat one I was uncertain whether to have the staccato above or below the high B.

-In measures 31 and 69, I'm not a wind player, so I was unsure about the staccato on the low F# in the bassoon part is actually a staccato or if it's just the way the player was interpreting the final note in the slur.

-In the section 52-69 I was going to include the high strings part on counts 2&3 in the right hand, but was running into some odd playability issues that I couldn't find a quick fix for that still sounded good. I was thinking that part wasn't super important so it might be fine to leave out of the arrangement, but at the same time I think it offers something different from the oom-pah-pah that's been going on the entire song, so I was wondering if maybe I should include it and try and figure out some convoluted way to make it happen.

-Measure 64 I wrote a courtesy sharp on the first F# in the bass, but was unsure whether or not I should also include one on the first F# in the RH part.

-Measures 12-15 I was considering raising an octave just to make it a little less boring to listen to.

[cashwarrior1]

Here are a couple things I caught myself that I was unsure what to do with, it'd be great if I could get a second opinion.

Won't be able to answer all of them but here's what I think.

-First 3 measures: I was unsure whether to write it like this in 2/4, or possible write it in 3/4, and then have a metric modulation into the fourth measure of Dotted Quarter = Quarter. Was wondering if anybody had thoughts on this.

I think it's in 2/4, but I don't think it's triplets. I'm hearing it as sixteenth notes and they end before beat 2.

Spoiler

[close]

-Measures 32-51 I was unsure what the standard notation was for stem direction and note placement when there are so many overlapping voices. I tried to keep the strings stem up and the clarinet and oboe stems down (wasn't sure about measure 33 since I only have the string parts written there, should the stems be down like they normally would be, or up to stay consistent with the rest of the line?). From what I've read, stems down notes are supposed to go on the left and stem up notes should go on the right when voices overlap, but I'm not super happy with the way it looks right now and was wondering if anybody had some suggestions for this spot.

I think the way you have it written right now is fine in terms of stem direction. Though, I would make 33 stem down just because there's no second layer in that measure. I would also make the second layer in RH of measure 31 point down (you may have to widen the stave just a little so it doesn't look cramped).

-Measure 37 beat one I was uncertain whether to have the staccato above or below the high B.

It would be above, because of the second layer.

-In measures 31 and 69, I'm not a wind player, so I was unsure about the staccato on the low F# in the bassoon part is actually a staccato or if it's just the way the player was interpreting the final note in the slur.

There's no staccato, they're probably just making the notes slightly disconnected so it feels more bouncy, but it's definitely not a staccato.

-Measure 64 I wrote a courtesy sharp on the first F# in the bass, but was unsure whether or not I should also include one on the first F# in the RH part.

It might be better to include it in the RH part, because if the player saw it in only the left hand, they might be confused into thinking the RH isn't an F#.

-Measures 12-15 I was considering raising an octave just to make it a little less boring to listen to.

I do believe that 12-31 is all up an octave and it might be better to put them up so it retains the bright/sparkling feeling of the original.

The updaters (or other people) who look more in depth with things may help with the other questions, but these are my thoughts for now.

[ManOfDucks]

I made edits to everything you mentioned except for this:

I do believe that 12-31 is all up an octave and it might be better to put them up so it retains the bright/sparkling feeling of the original.

I think it sounds thin with that much space between the right and left hand parts. The reason I was only thinking about moving it up an octave for 12-15 was because I thought it sounded a little repetitive since those same four measures are immediately repeated. I think it also adds to the arrangement a little since in the original recording measures 12-15 and 16-19 are played on different instruments. The only reason I haven't moved it up yet is (like I mentioned earlier) I think it sounds thin with so much space between the RH and LH parts.

Thank you for taking the time to provide feedback, I appreciate it!

[XiaoMigros]

Looking good! I actually did a full transcription of this recently, so hopefully I can provide some assistance (even if cash already pointed out most things):

• Daisuke Matsuoka and James Phillipsen were the only two composers who worked on Bowser's Fury
• I don't know NSM's exact policy on this, but I think there shouldn't be as many hidden rests in the second voice, while it does make the sheet more cluttered they're sometimes helpful for the performer nonetheless

[ManOfDucks]

Daisuke Matsuoka and James Phillipsen were the only two composers who worked on Bowser's Fury

Fixed this!

I don't know NSM's exact policy on this, but I think there shouldn't be as many hidden rests in the second voice, while it does make the sheet more cluttered they're sometimes helpful for the performer nonetheless

I made some of the rests visible, but there were a couple I left hidden (measures 35, 39, 43, and 47). I left these ones hidden for two reasons. The first is I don't think it's too confusing to have hidden rests in these measures since the rhythm in the second layer is quarter notes and they line up with the bass rhythm. The main reason though is that in measure 43 the layer 1 note is in an awkward place in the staff so I would either have to have the rest down between both staffs (which I thought would be even more confusing), or way above the staff (which I thought looked kinda silly). Because I couldn't get that one to work I decided to leave the other measures like it (35, 39, and 47) with their rests hidden just to maintain consistency.

Thank you very much for the feedback!

[Static]

• Regarding key signatures for modes, there's a lot of debate as to what is "correct." I'm fine with whatever the arranger chooses, but personally I prefer to use standard major/minor key signatures and add accidentals to show the mode. Exceptions might include Locrian, or something with the double harmonic/Byzantine scale like your previous sheet - this is technically a "major" scale going by the third alone, but often easier to read notated as minor. I might also keep the key signature if the piece changes between several centers while keeping the mode (C minor to F dorian for example). Don't (usually) pick a key signature just to elimate accidentals - it should inform the reader about the tonality in some way.
• I think it would be more helpful to simply indicate the tempo in quarter notes and leave out the q=q marking in m4. Because of how it's presented, by default most people I assume would try to feel the tempo in half notes, but then have to mentally adjust 4 bars in.
• You can move part of the composer text to a 2nd line so it's not so long, if you desire.
• The slur in m31 LH is touching the last note.
• m50 LH should be a Gsus4 chord (resolves to G in m51).
• m54 LH sounds like a Em7 (would suggest lowering the E to D on beats 2-3).
• I think the way you chose to hide the rests is fine. The visible rests are all part of the melody, so it makes that line more prominent, as it should be.

[ManOfDucks]

but personally I prefer to use standard major/minor key signatures and add accidentals to show the mode.

Makes sense, thanks for the insight!

I think it would be more helpful to simply indicate the tempo in quarter notes and leave out the q=q marking in m4. Because of how it's presented, by default most people I assume would try to feel the tempo in half notes, but then have to mentally adjust 4 bars in.
You can move part of the composer text to a 2nd line so it's not so long, if you desire.
The slur in m31 LH is touching the last note.
m50 LH should be a Gsus4 chord (resolves to G in m51).
m54 LH sounds like a Em7 (would suggest lowering the E to D on beats 2-3).

Fixed these.

Thank you for the feedback!

[Static]

Awesome, looks good. I'll approve now.

[Sebastian]

Alrighty, I apologize for the wait.

Feedback time... : )


M. 7 & 15 (LH): Maybe it's just me, but I'm not hearing that low A. Either it's an instrument different than the bassoon (or whatever) that I'm not hearing, or it's not there.
M. 22 (and recurring; LH): Looong ago on one of my very first submissions, Deku/Olimar, can't remember which, told me to never repeat the same note in a LH waltz accompaniment like this. In my opinion (and from what I was told many years ago), I wouldn't recommend repeating the downbeat note along with the second and upbeat notes. Additionally, I've never seen professionally published piano music do this. My personal recommendation would be to get rid of the top C in the octave on beat 1.
M. 26 (RH): Playability concerns are what come to mind in this measure. If your highest goal is to preserve the notes, it'll be fine. It's not impossible for sure. I just wanted to note that it's not the easiest to play. 
M. 68: I would recommend a FF (double forte) since it sounds more intense than the previous measures.
M. 69 (Both hands): Similarly, an accent on the first note of this measure would be nice.
- From what I'm seeing, there's an inconsistency with how the layers are being written. For example, M. 31 (and others like it), the rest in one of the layers is hidden, while in M. 32 (and others like it), the rest is present.
- Some of the chords in the LH sound muddy. That could be resolved by inverting the triads up.
- I've noticed that you have a few courtesy accidentals, which is good! But I would recommend combing through again and placing some where it'd be beneficial.

That's all I have for now! Loving this song. I can't wait to play the game when I get time...

[ManOfDucks]

Alrighty, I apologize for the wait.

No need to apologize, I understand how busy things can get this time of year!

M. 7 & 15 (LH): Maybe it's just me, but I'm not hearing that low A. Either it's an instrument different than the bassoon (or whatever) that I'm not hearing, or it's not there.

There is an A played by a string bass pizzicato in the recording, but it's way less prominent than the E in the bassoon. I was already debating keeping both the A and the E there because I think it sounds kinda gross having a random 5th in the bass, so I went ahead and removed it anyway since the E sticks out more in the recording.

M. 22 (and recurring; LH): Looong ago on one of my very first submissions, Deku/Olimar, can't remember which, told me to never repeat the same note in a LH waltz accompaniment like this. In my opinion (and from what I was told many years ago), I wouldn't recommend repeating the downbeat note along with the second and upbeat notes. Additionally, I've never seen professionally published piano music do this. My personal recommendation would be to get rid of the top C in the octave on beat 1.

For measure 22 I removed the C from the pah-pahs and kept the upper C since that's what's going on in the bassoon and I'd like to try and preserve that. I removed the bottom C to keep in line with what I did in measures 7/15/etc... since the string bass pizzicatos aren't as easy to hear. In measures 66-67 I removed the doubled notes on the pah-pahs as well.

M. 26 (RH): Playability concerns are what come to mind in this measure. If your highest goal is to preserve the notes, it'll be fine. It's not impossible for sure. I just wanted to note that it's not the easiest to play.

I don't think this measure is too bad to play, but if needed I think it's something the performer could always just cut the middle note out of.

M. 68: I would recommend a FF (double forte) since it sounds more intense than the previous measures.
M. 69 (Both hands): Similarly, an accent on the first note of this measure would be nice.

I think since the voicing gets thicker in these two measures it'll naturally be louder than the preceding measures, plus I feel like if the dynamic was written as FF it'd be interpreted as really hammering out those couple chords rather than just upping the intensity for a couple counts. That being said, I'm not super stubborn on this one and I'd be willing to change it if you still want me to!

- From what I'm seeing, there's an inconsistency with how the layers are being written. For example, M. 31 (and others like it), the rest in one of the layers is hidden, while in M. 32 (and others like it), the rest is present.

There's a reason for this!

I made some of the rests visible, but there were a couple I left hidden (measures 35, 39, 43, and 47). I left these ones hidden for two reasons. The first is I don't think it's too confusing to have hidden rests in these measures since the rhythm in the second layer is quarter notes and they line up with the bass rhythm. The main reason though is that in measure 43 the layer 1 note is in an awkward place in the staff so I would either have to have the rest down between both staffs (which I thought would be even more confusing), or way above the staff (which I thought looked kinda silly). Because I couldn't get that one to work I decided to leave the other measures like it (35, 39, and 47) with their rests hidden just to maintain consistency.

Static also pointed out that the rests I have visible are part of the melody and help draw attention to it, while the rests I have hidden are only part of an accompanying line, so it kind of ends up fitting.

- Some of the chords in the LH sound muddy. That could be resolved by inverting the triads up.

I don't think the finale playback does this piece justice . Most of them sound fine on an actual piano (in my opinion), but there were a couple (measures 50/51/and 62) where I went through and changed the inversions where I thought it made it sound less grumbly and didn't result in any leaps that were too wacky.

- I've noticed that you have a few courtesy accidentals, which is good! But I would recommend combing through again and placing some where it'd be beneficial.

I've added some in the following measures: 21 LH, 26 both hands, 28 both hands, 41 LH, 46 LH, and 48 LH!

Thank you very much for the helpful feedback!

[Sebastian]

I double checked the sheet, while cross-referencing with your reasoning. From what I'm seeing and the reasons you gave, I'm satisfied with the sheet!

Are there any more questions or does anyone else have any feedback? If not, I think this one's good.

[Latios212]

A couple teeny things on a skim before we finish up then!

- I think the dotted quarter in m. 31 would make more sense flipped downwards since it's continued in the lower layer. Accordingly, might make sense to put a quarter rest above it for the upper layer.
- I'm not too sure what the need is for some of these courtesy accidentals:
  - Putting it on the Cn in m. 21/41 makes sense since it comes after a long section of borrowing the C# from E Dorian. Maybe 23 as well. But why 26? There are no C#s in the several measures preceding it, and it comes right after the key signature. Similar for m. 46.
  - The F#s in m. 28 and 48, there are no F naturals for 3 measures preceding these parts.
- Once the courtesy accidentals (or lack of) are settled, make sure you have the right amount of space at the beginning of each measure, e.g. 40 and 48 have a bit much space because they already had extra space to account for the layers before introducing the courtesy accidentals. You could also use the Measure Tool to add a specific amount of space at the beginning of certain measures (like 0.05 in.) instead of using the Note Mover Tool to make the beat 1s less squished when there are multiple layers or accidentals.

[ManOfDucks]

- I think the dotted quarter in m. 31 would make more sense flipped downwards since it's continued in the lower layer. Accordingly, might make sense to put a quarter rest above it for the upper layer.

Done.

- I'm not too sure what the need is for some of these courtesy accidentals:

I just read through it and put them in whenever I missed an accidental. That being said there are far better sight-readers than me out there so I went ahead and removed the ones you suggested!

- Once the courtesy accidentals (or lack of) are settled, make sure you have the right amount of space at the beginning of each measure, e.g. 40 and 48 have a bit much space because they already had extra space to account for the layers before introducing the courtesy accidentals.

I combed back over the sheet and tried to remove the extra space in the measures I caught. I think it looks better but let me know if I missed any glaring spots!

You could also use the Measure Tool to add a specific amount of space at the beginning of certain measures (like 0.05 in.) instead of using the Note Mover Tool to make the beat 1s less squished when there are multiple layers or accidentals.

I had no idea this was a feature, thank you for the advice and the feedback!