[ARCADE] Radiant Silvergun - "RETURN" by Libera

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: Radiant Silvergun
Console: Arcade
Title: RETURN
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Libera

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Libera]

In the video and even in-game this has a weird loop that I'm almost certain is a mistake or a coding error, so I just made the final bar a full bar like expected.

[Kricketune54]

I've never understood why some soundtracks are ALL CAPS

-I'm not experienced with having a parentheses, though wondering if the tempo should be aligned with 3/4 a little more to the left.
-m.8 and m.16 the second layer rests seem a little low could they be put at the same level as m.12?
-m.17 the dynamic seems a bit high, is that done typically when a rest in the RH and a note in the LH?
-m.27 looks a bit tight could the system be widened a bit?
-m.32 the first RH chord would that be a Gb?  I was wondering if it was a Gb Major chord.  I also do not hear the F#/Gb in the second chord.  Same commentary applies for m.36.

[Libera]

-I'm not experienced with having a parentheses, though wondering if the tempo should be aligned with 3/4 a little more to the left.
-m.17 the dynamic seems a bit high, is that done typically when a rest in the RH and a note in the LH?

These sort of things don't really bother me that much unless they're wildly off, but I edited them a little anyway.

-m.8 and m.16 the second layer rests seem a little low could they be put at the same level as m.12?

Ah yes nice catch.  Either I forgot to edit those or they got reset somehow when I was messing around with the spacing in those bars, not sure which.

-m.27 looks a bit tight could the system be widened a bit?

I don't think it's that bad and it doesn't really seem worth it to mess up with the overall layout.

-m.32 the first RH chord would that be a Gb?  I was wondering if it was a Gb Major chord.  I also do not hear the F#/Gb in the second chord.  Same commentary applies for m.36.

Yeah the spellings here are a little weird.  I guess ideally they'd be C# and F# -> Bn and En (or with flats) but either way we get Cn+C# or Gn+Gb and since it's kind of hard to argue that the chord is all that tonal I figured it didn't really matter that much and it was probably better to preserve readability.  Re; the F# in the second chords I wasn't ever particularly sure whether they were there or it was just the previous F# but I figured I'd remove them now for consistency.

Thanks for having a look; files updated.

I've never understood why some soundtracks are ALL CAPS

No idea, although I think it fits with the overall aesthetic of the game pretty well.

[Static]

Ah yeah I remember checking this one out awhile back in your thread. Nice to see some Radiant Silvergun sheets.

• m8 LH: The bass goes from C# to Cn here, like in m16.
• m15 RH: That E natural is pretty close to the dots of the chord before it. Maybe move that note over a little bit.
• m18/22/38/42 LH: I think the last bass note is shifted over to beat 3.5 on these measures.
• m32/36 RH: The 2nd chord is missing an F#.
• m48/52 RH: Not sure I hear the 16th note C on beat 1.25 here. It sounds more like just two 8th notes, Bb and D.
• m49/53 RH beat 3: These 8th notes sound more separated than the surrounding notes, though I guess not as much as beat 3 of m45.
• The D.C. is hanging off the side of the staff just a little bit.

[Bloop]

Nice work on this one, lotsa chords happening here :p

-m2-3 and 6-8: There's a lower string voice here that adds a few more notes to the harmony (most notably a few A's). You could include them or just leave them out though:

I think it's there in m10-11 and 14-15 too, but it's a bit more subtle and might add a bit much to what you already have.
-m18-9: I think there are some more R.H. 8th notes that could use a staccato dot (m18 beat 2.5, m19 beat 2.5 and beat 3.25). Same in m22-23, 38-39 and 42-43.
-m37-44: It feel it's a bit weird how the bell part keeps switching between very audible octaves + marcato and a kinda subtle second voice here. Maybe it's an idea to reduce these to single notes, but keep them in a separate layer, like this:

Spoiler

[close]

I think you were expecting the player to use some pedal to hold those octaves, so that would take care of some of the repeated notes in my version.
-m46: There strings go to a pretty clear chord on beat 3:

(you could also include the C on beat 2 to the second layer)
-m51: I don't think I hear the Ab on beat 1, it might just be the reverb of the Ab the beat before.
-m54: I hear this in the L.H.:

[Libera]

You wait for an updater and then two come at once.


Static

Ah yeah I remember checking this one out awhile back in your thread. Nice to see some Radiant Silvergun sheets.

Yeah thanks for having a look before.  More activity for the PA thread haha.

m8 LH: The bass goes from C# to Cn here, like in m16.
m15 RH: That E natural is pretty close to the dots of the chord before it. Maybe move that note over a little bit.
m18/22/38/42 LH: I think the last bass note is shifted over to beat 3.5 on these measures.
The D.C. is hanging off the side of the staff just a little bit.

All these should be fixed.  I beamed bars 18/22 etc. to match the other bars which I thought looked neater.

m32/36 RH: The 2nd chord is missing an F#.

I actually originally had this in the sheet but was never sure it was really there.  Kricketune suggested I remove it and I agreed because I'm still not really convinced it's not just the F# lingering from before and I think it obscures the F# -> En movement between the chords.

m48/52 RH: Not sure I hear the 16th note C on beat 1.25 here. It sounds more like just two 8th notes, Bb and D.

I definitely hear the C on beat 1.25.


Bloop

Nice work on this one, lotsa chords happening here :p

Certainly lots of harmony in this one indeed.

-m2-3 and 6-8: There's a lower string voice here that adds a few more notes to the harmony (most notably a few A's). You could include them or just leave them out though:
I think it's there in m10-11 and 14-15 too, but it's a bit more subtle and might add a bit much to what you already have.

Yeah I think I'd prefer to stick to what I have at the moment so that you get the obvious build up from 3 note chords to 4 note chords as going from 4 note chords to 5 note chords would be somewhat horrible to play.  I think I'm already pushing the boundary a little bit in 9-16 and I don't want to lessen the impact of this extra harmony.

-m18-9: I think there are some more R.H. 8th notes that could use a staccato dot (m18 beat 2.5, m19 beat 2.5 and beat 3.25). Same in m22-23, 38-39 and 42-43.

The first two you mention do seem longer to me than the ones I currently have staccatos on, but I added a staccato onto the one in bar 19 etc.

-m37-44: It feel it's a bit weird how the bell part keeps switching between very audible octaves + marcato and a kinda subtle second voice here. Maybe it's an idea to reduce these to single notes, but keep them in a separate layer, like this:

Spoiler

[close]

I think you were expecting the player to use some pedal to hold those octaves, so that would take care of some of the repeated notes in my version.

I don't really think writing in the bell line like that is actually practically performable.  I guess it makes it academically more clear what is going on but I think from a performance viewpoint it just confuses things and doesn't really add anything.  I think it's easy enough to digest for the listener given that this bell part appeared in the arrangement from 27-35.

-m46: There strings go to a pretty clear chord on beat 3:

(you could also include the C on beat 2 to the second layer)

My original intention was to purely focus on the melody here and have the rhythm of the right hand match it but I like this as well, so I added it in.  It doesn't distract at all from the melody like I thought it might.

-m51: I don't think I hear the Ab on beat 1, it might just be the reverb of the Ab the beat before.

I definitely hear this Ab on beat 1.  The chord sounds distinctly different to me than in bar 47.

-m54: I hear this in the L.H.:

I actually hear notes on beat 2, 2.5, 3 and 3.5, but got rid of the one on beat 2.5 to emphasise this final chord more.  I think it's fine though adding a single note on beat 2.5 and everything still works out nicely.  The note on beat 3.5 might be a little hard to catch due to the weird cut-off loop...


Thanks for checking, both of you!  It's much appreciated.  I've updated the files.

[Bloop]

I actually originally had this in the sheet but was never sure it was really there.  Kricketune suggested I remove it and I agreed because I'm still not really convinced it's not just the F# lingering from before and I think it obscures the F# -> En movement between the chords.

Just adding in my two cents, but I agree on leaving it out: I think it's reverb or just a held note, but tying it over is a bit awkward to play.

I definitely hear the C on beat 1.25.

This was also something that I was considering commenting about: I can hear it a bit in m48, but I also don't think it's there in 52. In both cases, if it's there, it's definitely more subtle than the other 16th note runs, which makes it a bit dubious if it's something else in the mix.

I don't really think writing in the bell line like that is actually practically performable.  I guess it makes it academically more clear what is going on but I think from a performance viewpoint it just confuses things and doesn't really add anything.  I think it's easy enough to digest for the listener given that this bell part appeared in the arrangement from 27-35.

I actually do think it's playable if a pedal is allowed to be used, which I assumed was the case here. The only difference then is asking the performer to play the notes a bit louder, as the placement of the notes is still the same.
Aside from that though, the main thing that bothered me is that there are currently just a few bell notes that get the full octave + marcato treatment, while the rest is just a little added harmony. I felt that the line could be brought out better by toning down on the octaves and possibly increasing the strength of the harmony notes. If you still really wanna keep it as is, though, that's fine too of course, I just wanted to make clear where I'm coming from with this.
 

I definitely hear this Ab on beat 1.  The chord sounds distinctly different to me than in bar 47.

It doesn't sound that distinctly different to me though, maybe this is worth a second opinion?

All other things are good!

[Libera]

This was also something that I was considering commenting about: I can hear it a bit in m48, but I also don't think it's there in 52. In both cases, if it's there, it's definitely more subtle than the other 16th note runs, which makes it a bit dubious if it's something else in the mix.

Yeah it's subtler than the other ones but I'm pretty sure it's there.  At least that is what I can hear.

I actually do think it's playable if a pedal is allowed to be used, which I assumed was the case here. The only difference then is asking the performer to play the notes a bit louder, as the placement of the notes is still the same.
Aside from that though, the main thing that bothered me is that there are currently just a few bell notes that get the full octave + marcato treatment, while the rest is just a little added harmony. I felt that the line could be brought out better by toning down on the octaves and possibly increasing the strength of the harmony notes. If you still really wanna keep it as is, though, that's fine too of course, I just wanted to make clear where I'm coming from with this.

It's not playing the notes that is impractical, it's these marcato harmony notes hidden under the melody and in chords that I think are practically impossible to play any differently to if they were just written in as harmony notes (as I have done).  Probably some insanely technically talented pianist could pull it off in a performance but I think at the cost of making this section much harder to read and cluttered it's definitely not worth it.

Yes this solution is not perfect but the only other thing I would consider doing it just removing the notes entirely and just having this section be a repeat of bars 17-24, which I think this is better than.  I guess I could also drop the current octaves to single notes but I think having them be octaves helps to differentiate them from the melody part and also matches them with what happens in 27-35.

It doesn't sound that distinctly different to me though, maybe this is worth a second opinion?

Feel free to ask for one.

[Bloop]

I guess it's my own piano background that made me think it wouldn't be as hard: moving your arm behind a key in a chord causes that key to be a bit more accentuated than the others. This:

I guess I could also drop the current octaves to single notes but I think having them be octaves helps to differentiate them from the melody part and also matches them with what happens in 27-35.

was one of the options I was thinking about as well. I think the marcatos alone are enough as reference to the part in 27-35, but blending into the melody might be a bit of a problem if you're not trying to listen to one of the two lines.

[Static]

I am hearing m32/36/48/52 as you have them now. Those extra 16ths are hard to hear at first since the texture is so dense, but the more I listen to it the more I can make out that melody. All the other changes look good as well.

As for m47/51, after listening again I don't hear an Ab in either case. Both measures sound the same to me.

[Libera]

As for m47/51, after listening again I don't hear an Ab in either case. Both measures sound the same to me.

Since neither of you hear it, I'll remove it.  I don't mind that much.  Files updated.

I guess it's my own piano background that made me think it wouldn't be as hard: moving your arm behind a key in a chord causes that key to be a bit more accentuated than the others. This:was one of the options I was thinking about as well. I think the marcatos alone are enough as reference to the part in 27-35, but blending into the melody might be a bit of a problem if you're not trying to listen to one of the two lines.

We all play piano here.  I understand that it is physically possible, but I think it is very difficult to get across in a performance and as such is not worth it.  With single lines, there is the other problem as you say of confusion with the melody.  I want to leave this section as it is.

[Static]

Looks good, I approve

[Bloop]

And I'll follow with an accept then!

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Bloop.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot