[MUL] Shovel Knight: Plague of Shadows - "Le Bouquet Magique" by Zeila

Started by Zeta, May 31, 2021, 03:20:58 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zeta

Submission Information:

Series: Other
Game: Shovel Knight: Plague of Shadows
Console: Multiplatform
Title: Le Bouquet Magique
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Zeila

[attachment deleted by admin]

Zeila

Two things:
  • m67, m75-78, m166-168 I'm unsure about these sections in particular
  • m152 does "poco a poco a tempo" make sense, or would there be a better way to describe a gradual return to tempo after a molto ritardando (like if writing that in English would be better)?

Latios212

Wow. This is a really cool piece. It sounds like it could be something out of Your Lie in April...

Quote from: Zeila on May 31, 2021, 03:25:21 PMm152 does "poco a poco a tempo" make sense, or would there be a better way to describe a gradual return to tempo after a molto ritardando (like if writing that in English would be better)?
I don't know much Italian past a few musical directions, but I don't think this really makes sense... right? "little by little" "in time"? The "little by little" should probably apply to an accel./rit. because an instruction to play at tempo is static. Here I'd suggest just using an accel. instead and indicating which measure you want to put the "a tempo" (if you even want an "a tempo" at all since it's really loose and slows down a few measures later anyway).
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

Zeila

Quote from: Latios212 on June 09, 2021, 08:07:56 PMWow. This is a really cool piece. It sounds like it could be something out of Your Lie in April...
Agreed, the instrumentation and style are a great fit

Quote from: Latios212 on June 09, 2021, 08:07:56 PMI don't know much Italian past a few musical directions, but I don't think this really makes sense... right? "little by little" "in time"? The "little by little" should probably apply to an accel./rit. because an instruction to play at tempo is static. Here I'd suggest just using an accel. instead and indicating which measure you want to put the "a tempo" (if you even want an "a tempo" at all since it's really loose and slows down a few measures later anyway).
Yeah that's fair. I just wanted this one to be more loosely interpreted so I didn't explicitly mark where "a tempo" would go. I'll change it to "poco accel." and will update it once there are more concrete changes to make, thanks!

Latios212

Really sorry for the wait. I really need a clear head to be able to go through this one... haha. I'll see how far I get right now.

- I think the chords in m. 19 don't have the B on top
- m. 21 - I hear the upper piano voice going A# > F# - maybe omit the A# on beat 3? (Or maybe I'm getting distracted by the low voice)
- The f shouldn't be on the chord in m. 36, it's suddenly quieter there. Maybe the f at the end of 35 and a mp or something at the beginning of 36?
- I would suggest taking the F# out of the dyad in m. 38 in favor of keeping the violin melody on beat 3.5 instead
- Gn should be F# in m. 48 (3rd above D# root)

That covers the first two pages, up until just over a minute in. Looking solid so far, I appreciate the attention to detail :)
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

Zeila

Quote from: Latios212 on September 15, 2021, 07:28:31 PMReally sorry for the wait. I really need a clear head to be able to go through this one... haha. I'll see how far I get right now.
That's understandable, this is quite dense. Thanks for going over it in the first place lol

Quote from: Latios212 on September 15, 2021, 07:28:31 PM- m. 21 - I hear the upper piano voice going A# > F# - maybe omit the A# on beat 3? (Or maybe I'm getting distracted by the low voice)
I still hear it as A# > A#

Quote from: Latios212 on September 15, 2021, 07:28:31 PM- Gn should be F# in m. 48 (3rd above D# root)
You meant Fx right? Done, and I also added a courtesy accidental in m49

Quote from: Latios212 on September 15, 2021, 07:28:31 PM- I think the chords in m. 19 don't have the B on top
- The f shouldn't be on the chord in m. 36, it's suddenly quieter there. Maybe the f at the end of 35 and a mp or something at the beginning of 36?
- I would suggest taking the F# out of the dyad in m. 38 in favor of keeping the violin melody on beat 3.5 instead
Fixed!

Aside from that, I went over it again and changed the following:

Spoiler
- m61 Added B's to the chords
- m69/70 LH changed B's to G#'s
- m72 LH added octaves below
- m81-83 made a few modifications to that run
- m84 LH beat 1 removed G#
- m85 LH beat 1 lowered an octave
- m123/125 LH removed E's on beat 2 and F's on beat 3
- m127 LH made it all one layer and repeated the B and D# on beat 3
- m130 LH beat 1 added an arpeggio marking here
- m135 added a low D# and E to that behemoth of a chord. If the left hand takes the lower octave then it still seems playable since there's also a ritardando for interpretation
- m140 RH added a G# below
- m144 RH beat 3.5 added B
- m145 LH beat 3 changed B to F#
- m146 LH beat 1 made the A's a rest instead; this sounds pretty empty but I suppose that is because the reverb/echo of a grand fills up the space in the actual song
- m147 LH beat 3 removed G#
- m148 LH added low D#'s to those chords
- m149 LH beat 2 removed D#
- m150 LH beat 3 changed E to F#
- m151 LH beat 1.5 added F#
- m154 LH beat 2 removed E#
- m159 RH beat 1 added F#; beat 2 added B
- m162 I lowered the second layer by an octave and shifted some notes to the LH so the RH could stand out more play the E# on beat 2.5; I also lowered the B on beat 1 of measure 161 to tie the melody note
- m169 RH beat 2 removed G#; added B and E to beats 3 and 3.5 respectively
- m170 RH added part of the violin melody here and included an E in m171
- m171 RH beat 1 removed C#; beat 2.5 removed G#; beat 3.5 added G#
- m172 RH beat 1 changed G# to F#; beat 3.5 added C# from the violin
- m191 RH changed G# and F# to E and D#
- m193 RH changed Dn to D#
- m195 LH added octaves except for beat 3.5
[close]

I hope that none of these are anti-fixes, but it wouldn't be surprising given the nature of this song ;-;

Latios212

Pages 1-2 look good :) Taking a look at pages 3-4 now. (Didn't refer directly to your list of adjustments past the first couple of pages since I didn't check anything past page 2 earlier - just going off the current files.)
- Some more major thirds spelled incorrectly in the LH - use Gx (yikes) in m. 62, Fx in 64, E# in 66, B# in m. 97-98
- I think the low B in m. 68 should be octave doubled below (probably use an 8vb here)
- I think the LH B in m. 81 should be an octave lower
- The rhythm of the RH in m. 82 is striking me as somewhat odd... perhaps the first couple of beats may be better as quintuplets like in the previous measure since the timing here is pretty loose (and I think a bit more even than you have written with 32nd and 16th notes right now)?
- Octave D# in m. 88 sounds like it should be lower
- Not sure I hear the LH chord on beat 1 of m. 89? That chord strike overall is just quieter...
- I would recommend indicating that the last two beats of m. 98 are a pickup to the violin melody in the next measure. I know you've somewhat mixed the violin part with the other parts in the RH which is fine, but here the staccatos on these chords is the opposite of what the melody articulates so that makes me hesitate a bit. Maybe split the top note off to stem up?
- The triads in m. 111-112 are a bit less forceful than in the original. I would recommend octave doubling the top note on bottom.
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

Zeila

Quote from: Latios212 on November 08, 2021, 03:51:38 PM- I would recommend indicating that the last two beats of m. 98 are a pickup to the violin melody in the next measure. I know you've somewhat mixed the violin part with the other parts in the RH which is fine, but here the staccatos on these chords is the opposite of what the melody articulates so that makes me hesitate a bit. Maybe split the top note off to stem up?
It would've looked ugly if I just used the split stem tool (since the B# conflicts with the An), so I separated them into two different layers

The rest should be fixed, thanks!

Latios212

Changes look good; onward to page 5 and the rest! (Starting around 2:24)

- Lowest note of second dyad in m. 126 sounds like B instead of A (missing the major seventh sound in this chord)
- m. 127 beat 3 I don't hear anything besides the G#s
- Dim. hairpin in m. 135 touches the stem of m. beat 1
- Slur in m. 143 could use a little adjusting
- Sharp colliding with stuff in m. 154 (m. 153 is pretty tight too)
- Similar to one of my earlier comments about the violin melody being obscures in the staccato quarter in m. 163 beat 3 - would recommend stemming melody up here
- m. 166 - Fx instead of Gn on beat 1?
- m. 169 - don't think I hear the RH harmonies under the melody in beats 2.5-3?
- m. 170 beat 1 LH - sounds like it should be an octave down
- m. 171 RH - I hear a G# on beat 2.5 but not 3.5
- m. 172 RH last note sounds like a single A#
- I think the LH chord in m. 183 is missing a B#
- Fx in m. 187-188 should be respelled as Gn (third above E bass). I think the F# in the RH of 188 should also be a Gn. (Also remove the courtesy sharp in m. 189)
- I don't hear any of the octaves in m. 190 LH, it just sounds like one sustained low F#
- I think the D# in m. 193 would be better off as Eb
- m. 202 should be octave doubled below the LH

Phew, I think that's it. Overall an awesome sheet! I'll probably print it out to play once we finish but all the fast chords and sharps might put me off a bit ahaha
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

Zeila

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- m. 169 - don't think I hear the RH harmonies under the melody in beats 2.5-3?
I removed all of them except the B on beat 3

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- m. 170 beat 1 LH - sounds like it should be an octave down
I'm not sure if you made a typo because I still hear m170 the same, but think m169 beat 1 should be lowered an octave

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- m. 171 RH - I hear a G# on beat 2.5 but not 3.5
Did you mean that you hear a G# on beat 3 instead of 2.5? I got rid of the one on beat 3.5

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- m. 172 RH last note sounds like a single A#
The C# was from the violin part, but I can remove it if it's better off without it. For now I just split the two voices

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- Fx in m. 187-188 should be respelled as Gn (third above E bass). I think the F# in the RH of 188 should also be a Gn. (Also remove the courtesy sharp in m. 189)
I changed Fx to Gn and removed the courtesy sharp, but I still left the F# the same. I do hear a Gn in that octave range, but the Fx is from the line that goes Fx -> E -> C# (originally up an octave)

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- I don't hear any of the octaves in m. 190 LH, it just sounds like one sustained low F#
I think you're right that it's just the low F#, but I also hear it re-articulated on beat 3. I also moved the clef change to the start of m191 instead of m190

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- Lowest note of second dyad in m. 126 sounds like B instead of A (missing the major seventh sound in this chord)
- m. 127 beat 3 I don't hear anything besides the G#s
- Dim. hairpin in m. 135 touches the stem of m. beat 1
- Slur in m. 143 could use a little adjusting
- Sharp colliding with stuff in m. 154 (m. 153 is pretty tight too)
- Similar to one of my earlier comments about the violin melody being obscures in the staccato quarter in m. 163 beat 3 - would recommend stemming melody up here
- m. 166 - Fx instead of Gn on beat 1?
- I think the LH chord in m. 183 is missing a B#
- I think the D# in m. 193 would be better off as Eb
- m. 202 should be octave doubled below the LH
Fixed, thanks!

Latios212

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- m. 170 beat 1 LH - sounds like it should be an octave down
Quote from: Zeila on November 22, 2021, 03:59:55 PMI'm not sure if you made a typo because I still hear m170 the same, but think m169 beat 1 should be lowered an octave
169 looks good as you have it now, but I still think the F# octave in m. 170 should be lower (that wasn't a typo)

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- m. 171 RH - I hear a G# on beat 2.5 but not 3.5
Quote from: Zeila on November 22, 2021, 03:59:55 PMDid you mean that you hear a G# on beat 3 instead of 2.5? I got rid of the one on beat 3.5
Nope, that wasn't a typo either, beats 2.5 and 3 both sound like the same triad of C#-E-G# and beat 3.5 sounds like a sole B

Quote from: Latios212 on November 18, 2021, 04:49:05 PM- m. 172 RH last note sounds like a single A#
Quote from: Zeila on November 22, 2021, 03:59:55 PMThe C# was from the violin part, but I can remove it if it's better off without it. For now I just split the two voices
Oh got it. That feels a bit weird because the D# from that voice wasn't present earlier in the measure like in 170. Would that be too messy to write in too?

That's all, the rest of the changes look good :)
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

Zeila

Quote from: Latios212 on November 28, 2021, 03:20:14 PMOh got it. That feels a bit weird because the D# from that voice wasn't present earlier in the measure like in 170. Would that be too messy to write in too?
I thought it would look too cluttered, but ultimately I decided to keep the violin melody up an octave since it's not unreasonable to play. That way it's more consistent and less messy too :3

I fixed the other two points as well

Latios212

Alright looks good! Last thing I would suggest is to flip the lower layer in m. 173 upwards.

I think that's it from me though, so I will approve at last~
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

Bloop

what a beautiful piece, never expected something like this to be in a game, haha. Very nice work figuring all this stuff out! I'm going over the first 4 pages now:

-m3: I think the rhythm in this measure should be somewhat similar to the one in m5. The rubato makes everything a bit weird, but I feel the B-C# dyad on beat 2.66 more as a early 3rd beat, than I feel the R.H. E on beat 3 as a late 3rd beat.
-m4: The dyad on beat 2 gets restruck on beat 3 too (a bit softer)
-m5: I don't think the chord on beat 2 is rolled in the original, definitely not as much as in m1 though.
-m9: I think the A# in the L.H. should be a F#
-m27: The violin slides to the C# at the end of this bar, maybe instead of A# you could use B on beat 3.5? Or possibly 2 sixteenths A# and B
-m55: I think you can still add the mordent on beat 1 here, taking octaves with the 1st and 4th finger isn't that uncommon.
-m76: Instead of 'dim to p' at the end here, you could just use a decrescendo hair pin to signify that the last note should be softer.
-m82: this is horror
I think I hear something like this, or at least this order of notes:
You cannot view this attachment.
Maybe it's worth thinking about writing m81-83 as a cadenza? There's not really a clear pulse, so maybe giving the player more freedom in these 3 bars could work.
-m86-87: I hear the bass notes being doubled an octave lower too
-m89: I don't think I hear something new on beat 1 here, and I also don't think I hear the top C# on beat 2.
-m90: I also don't hear the E and F# in the L.H. here.
-m95: Also don't hear the bottom F#'s in the L.H.
-m111-112: i'm breaking my brain over this rhythm what
I think I hear something like this?
You cannot view this attachment.
I'm not sure what the composer originally intended, but I hear the melody in this kind 4/4-ish rhythm (with the last note a little bit longer for classical-rubato-purposes). If you'd rather keep it as is, that's fine too, because I'm not 100% sure either way.

Lastly, maybe it's an idea to specify pedal marks for places where it's ambiguous how the pedal should be used. A few examples are m9-11 ("should the pedal be lifted at m10 or not?") and m75-76 ("do I re-pedal every chord, or somewhere halfway?")


Zeila

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AMwhat a beautiful piece, never expected something like this to be in a game, haha. Very nice work figuring all this stuff out! I'm going over the first 4 pages now:
Technically it's only in the soundtrack and not in the actual game (afaik), but yeah it's still a surprising, yet lovely arrangement of Waltz for One. Thanks btw! :3

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AM-m9: I think the A# in the L.H. should be a F#
I still hear an A#, but I'll put down an F# too now that you pointed it out. When I play-tested that chord beforehand, I already took the A# with my RH and played the D# with my LH, and it still works out with the additional F#

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AM-m27: The violin slides to the C# at the end of this bar, maybe instead of A# you could use B on beat 3.5? Or possibly 2 sixteenths A# and B
I decided to go with the sixteenth triplet A#-B-B#

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AM-m82: this is horror
I think I hear something like this, or at least this order of notes:
~snip~
Maybe it's worth thinking about writing m81-83 as a cadenza? There's not really a clear pulse, so maybe giving the player more freedom in these 3 bars could work.
It's certainly a struggle ;-; . How's this?
You cannot view this attachment.

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AM-m89: I don't think I hear something new on beat 1 here, and I also don't think I hear the top C# on beat 2.
The missing C# is more clear than beat 1, but I got rid of both because it's hard to tell if I imagined the beat 1 chord or not

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AM-m95: Also don't hear the bottom F#'s in the L.H.
I think I just lowered the F#'s an octave so it wouldn't interfere with the melody, but it doesn't add much so I got rid of them

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AM-m111-112: i'm breaking my brain over this rhythm what
I think I hear something like this?
~snip~
I'm not sure what the composer originally intended, but I hear the melody in this kind 4/4-ish rhythm (with the last note a little bit longer for classical-rubato-purposes). If you'd rather keep it as is, that's fine too, because I'm not 100% sure either way.
I ended up modifying that section up until the fermata. I kept measure 112 (110 now after the cadenza change) the same since I feel like the triplet motion is more pronounced. Then I wrote out the RH in m111(109) as a triplet in 2/4 time since the pulse sounds the same between those two measures, and then I wrote measures 114-119(112-117) in 2/4 so that the G natural starts on beat 1

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AMLastly, maybe it's an idea to specify pedal marks for places where it's ambiguous how the pedal should be used. A few examples are m9-11 ("should the pedal be lifted at m10 or not?") and m75-76 ("do I re-pedal every chord, or somewhere halfway?")
I would rather leave it to the performer's discretion given that it's a very expressive piece and I'm not even completely sure on what it's supposed to be in the original

Quote from: Bloop on December 03, 2021, 05:56:01 AM-m3: I think the rhythm in this measure should be somewhat similar to the one in m5. The rubato makes everything a bit weird, but I feel the B-C# dyad on beat 2.66 more as a early 3rd beat, than I feel the R.H. E on beat 3 as a late 3rd beat.
-m4: The dyad on beat 2 gets restruck on beat 3 too (a bit softer)
-m5: I don't think the chord on beat 2 is rolled in the original, definitely not as much as in m1 though.
-m55: I think you can still add the mordent on beat 1 here, taking octaves with the 1st and 4th finger isn't that uncommon.
-m76: Instead of 'dim to p' at the end here, you could just use a decrescendo hair pin to signify that the last note should be softer.
-m86-87: I hear the bass notes being doubled an octave lower too
-m90: I also don't hear the E and F# in the L.H. here.
Quote from: Latios212 on December 02, 2021, 05:15:03 PMAlright looks good! Last thing I would suggest is to flip the lower layer in m. 173 upwards.
Got these too \o/