[SW] Animal Crossing: New Horizons - "Nook's Cranny (Before Closing)" by Kricketune54

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Animal Crossing
Game: Animal Crossing: New Horizons
Console: Nintendo Switch
Title: Nook's Cranny (Before Closing)
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Kricketune54

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Kricketune54]

My curtain call for 2021.


Few things to note:

Tried to stay faithful with which melody notes are tied over- but in one case I have removed ties in the RH notes (ex m14-16).  Let me know though if this "compromise" method doesn't make sense from a consistency standpoint with regards to which fingers will play which notes.
m5 - LH beat 3 is a pitch in the chord (Cn) because the Gn and F# that technically should be next to each other in the RH sounded bad together imo.  I moved the C on beat 4.5 (which technically is a part of the LH layer part) to the RH
m11- the Fn in the dotted half RH layer is up an octave
m17- I counted it to be about 2 bars and a full measure rest- I figured it would be easier and a little more common sensical to just do a fermata here though.
m30- In RH bottom layer there is a Cn and Dn on beats 2 and 3.   So far as I can tell though they aren't playable in original octave (and don't work super well up an octave when compared to the original) so added chord notes that fit
m33- the nonaccented/length of the LH En is intentional to how I heard the part

Overall, definitely played around with the second half of the song as far as non-melody layer octaves

[Bloop]

I play animal crossing too early to have ever heard this song haha, nice work!

Tried to stay faithful with which melody notes are tied over- but in one case I have removed ties in the RH notes (ex m14-16).  Let me know though if this "compromise" method doesn't make sense from a consistency standpoint with regards to which fingers will play which notes.

You could possibly add ties to the G on beat 3.5 in those bars, so there's still a G sounding in each bar without it being necessarily restruck. Btw, in m3, there's a tie on the E that could be removed for consistency (it's also clashing with a dot anyway).

m5 - LH beat 3 is a pitch in the chord (Cn) because the Gn and F# that technically should be next to each other in the RH sounded bad together imo.  I moved the C on beat 4.5 3.5 (which technically is a part of the LH layer part) to the RH

Maybe it's an idea to replace that C on beat 3.5 with a Bb in the L.H. to keep the left hand movement: the C in the R.H. could be interpreted as a second voice to the strings. It's technically not the note that's actually being played, but I think some arranger's freedom is alright in this case.

m30- In RH bottom layer there is a Cn and Dn on beats 2 and 3.   So far as I can tell though they aren't playable in original octave (and don't work super well up an octave when compared to the original) so added chord notes that fit

I don't hear a C on beat 2 anyway, I hear a Dn in the higher strings that's held on beat 2 and 3 that's easy to include and works pretty well I think. The only 'non-original' note here is the G in beat 3 instead of the D, but that's fine!

Overall, definitely played around with the second half of the song as far as non-melody layer octaves

Most of the original inversions of the accompaniment chords are a bit hard to play in their current octaves, as the player either has to use stretch one hand a lot, or they have to trade off between the R.H. and L.H. which is a bit awkward sometimes. You could also use some arranger's freedom here too by inverting some of the chords: m19 one inversion up, m23 either the same or one inversion up, m27 two inversions up. Not too sure what I'd do exactly with 31 and 33, but maybe both one octave and one inversion down, and moving the lower two notes of the note on beat 1 to the other layer as quarter notes.

Onto my own comments:
-m5 and 22: I think the F#'s in these bars work better as Gb's, as they seem to be leading down to an F.
-m9: Maybe you could add a courtesy accidental on the top Gn on beat 2, so it's extra clear this isn't a G# like in the chord.
-m10, 11 and 15: Make sure the beams on beat 2 are pointed down like all the others.
-m12: I hear an F below on beat 2 instead of a C (which fits the pattern too ).
-m26: The Db on beat 3 should be a C# (it's a leading tone to the Dm chord). Also, there's an A below this C# too.
-m28: Make sure the Db's here are either C#'s like in m11, or change m11 to have Db's to match m28. They're the same chords, so they should be spelled the same. I think my personal preference goes toward Db to show the descending motion, but either works I think.
-m31: I hear a C below the E too in the strings.
-m32: I hear an F below on beat 1, as well as an Ab in between on beat 3. The flat of the Ab on beat 1 is a bit close to the barline too.
-m34: I think the R.H. arpeggio may work a bit better as an wavy line arpeggio instead of a written out arpeggio, because the 16ths end up being about twice as slow in the ritenuto than the arpeggio. You could then even write "slow arpegg." above, if you want.

[Kricketune54]

I play animal crossing too early to have ever heard this song haha, nice work!

Dang really? I thought this was one of the most well known songs from NH regardless if you heard it in game or not but yeah only heard this a couple times in game myself

You could possibly add ties to the G on beat 3.5 in those bars, so there's still a G sounding in each bar without it being necessarily restruck. Btw, in m3, there's a tie on the E that could be removed for consistency (it's also clashing with a dot anyway).

I added these ties- these are separate layers so I did some tie tool work to ensure they connect together visually.  I do actually hear that E tying as is there, but for consistency I will take it out.  Also moved that note to the second layer in m3-4

Maybe it's an idea to replace that C on beat 3.5 with a Bb in the L.H. to keep the left hand movement: the C in the R.H. could be interpreted as a second voice to the strings. It's technically not the note that's actually being played, but I think some arranger's freedom is alright in this case.

I was having a little bit of a hard time understanding this bit so let me know if the changes on m5 were what you were envisioning.  Made LH 3.0 Cn, and Bb on 3.5; both eighths to keep the movement.  Kept the Cn in the RH.

I don't hear a C on beat 2 anyway, I hear a Dn in the higher strings that's held on beat 2 and 3 that's easy to include and works pretty well I think. The only 'non-original' note here is the G in beat 3 instead of the D, but that's fine!

Looking at this again, not sure why I didn't include the D, but I put it in.  I like to keep it pretty original so if you hear any other notes that were on beat 3, I'll remove G but otherwise these work for me

Most of the original inversions of the accompaniment chords are a bit hard to play in their current octaves, as the player either has to use stretch one hand a lot, or they have to trade off between the R.H. and L.H. which is a bit awkward sometimes. You could also use some arranger's freedom here too by inverting some of the chords: m19 one inversion up, m23 either the same or one inversion up, m27 two inversions up. Not too sure what I'd do exactly with 31 and 33, but maybe both one octave and one inversion down, and moving the lower two notes of the note on beat 1 to the other layer as quarter notes.

Okay, took some time to figure this out... I wish there was a way to make m31 and m33 different but also sound good (tried some further inverting of 33 but it didn't sound very satisfying), but I think my updates reflect your feedback here.

-m5 and 22: I think the F#'s in these bars work better as Gb's, as they seem to be leading down to an F.
-m9: Maybe you could add a courtesy accidental on the top Gn on beat 2, so it's extra clear this isn't a G# like in the chord.
-m10, 11 and 15: Make sure the beams on beat 2 are pointed down like all the others.
-m12: I hear an F below on beat 2 instead of a C (which fits the pattern too ).
-m26: The Db on beat 3 should be a C# (it's a leading tone to the Dm chord). Also, there's an A below this C# too.
-m31: I hear a C below the E too in the strings.

Fixed all of these, not sure what was up with m12 lol

-m28: Make sure the Db's here are either C#'s like in m11, or change m11 to have Db's to match m28. They're the same chords, so they should be spelled the same. I think my personal preference goes toward Db to show the descending motion, but either works I think.

Db it is!

-m32: I hear an F below on beat 1, as well as an Ab in between on beat 3. The flat of the Ab on beat 1 is a bit close to the barline too.

Added, hopefully the flat isn't too close now

-m34: I think the R.H. arpeggio may work a bit better as an wavy line arpeggio instead of a written out arpeggio, because the 16ths end up being about twice as slow in the ritenuto than the arpeggio. You could then even write "slow arpegg." above, if you want.

updated m34 to this.  Everything should be addressed now!

[Bloop]

Dang really? I thought this was one of the most well known songs from NH regardless if you heard it in game or not but yeah only heard this a couple times in game myself

Ah yeah, I haven't really taken the time to listen to other songs (aside from a few early AM tracks), I'm not up with what's well known haha.

I was having a little bit of a hard time understanding this bit so let me know if the changes on m5 were what you were envisioning.  Made LH 3.0 Cn, and Bb on 3.5; both eighths to keep the movement.  Kept the Cn in the RH.

What you have is what I meant. except for the Cn in the R.H. on beat 3.5. You added that note in as it was part of the L.H./harp figure, but I suggested the current L.H. figure as replacement, so you can just delete that Cn ^^

Looking at this again, not sure why I didn't include the D, but I put it in.  I like to keep it pretty original so if you hear any other notes that were on beat 3, I'll remove G but otherwise these work for me

Nice! What I hear in the original is a low D instead of the G, but that's not really playable with the melody line, and the D an octave higher is already there now on beat 2. You can keep the notes as is! For beat 2 itself, maybe you could move layer 2 a little bit to the right, or flip the beam of layer 3 and move that a little bit to the right, so the half note is more clearly visible:
You cannot view this attachment. or You cannot view this attachment.

Okay, took some time to figure this out... I wish there was a way to make m31 and m33 different but also sound good (tried some further inverting of 33 but it didn't sound very satisfying), but I think my updates reflect your feedback here.

That's pretty much what I meant, nice! m27 could go one inversion down though, so the player can keep holding the top F. For m33, you could optionally do something like this, so the jump up to the arpeggio is a bit less sudden:
You cannot view this attachment.

Some additional comments on the changes:
-m16: You don't need the tie on the G on beat 3.5 here, as there's no G to tie to in m17.
-m18: the most nitpickiest of nitpicks: you can move the mp dynamic marking a bit up by copying m1 over to m18 :p
-m19: The L.H. note should be beamed up and the rests raised a bit, probably something left over when you were experimenting with the layers.
-m21 and 25: Maybe you could raise the quarter rests in beat 3 of the R.H. a little bit. If you've moved the notes of m29 one inversion down, this quarter rest on beat 3 will probably be able to go back down a little too.
-m22: With changing the F#'s to Gb's, I meant the L.H. too (beat 2.5)
-m23-24: The dots of the high G need to be raised so they don't clash with the notes in layer 2. Also, maybe the sharp in m24 could go a bit closer to the note too :p
-m33: Something I just thought about, maybe you could add a tenuto mark on the L.H. note, so it's extra clear the missing staccato was intentional? ^^
-m34: Maybe you can add a fermate on the rest on beat 3, so it's clear the player needs to take a little more time before repeating the song.

[Kricketune54]

Ah yeah, I haven't really taken the time to listen to other songs (aside from a few early AM tracks), I'm not up with what's well known haha.

Oh definitely give the soundtrack a chance!  It's really quite excellent for the relaxed style and for the times it gets more swingy or jazzy.  Highly recommend the holiday tracks, particularly new years (which is coming up  ).

What you have is what I meant. except for the Cn in the R.H. on beat 3.5. You added that note in as it was part of the L.H./harp figure, but I suggested the current L.H. figure as replacement, so you can just delete that Cn ^^

Okay took out the Cn in RH.

Nice! What I hear in the original is a low D instead of the G, but that's not really playable with the melody line, and the D an octave higher is already there now on beat 2. You can keep the notes as is! For beat 2 itself, maybe you could move layer 2 a little bit to the right, or flip the beam of layer 3 and move that a little bit to the right, so the half note is more clearly visible:
You cannot view this attachment. or You cannot view this attachment.

Went with option 1

That's pretty much what I meant, nice! m27 could go one inversion down though, so the player can keep holding the top F. For m33, you could optionally do something like this, so the jump up to the arpeggio is a bit less sudden:
You cannot view this attachment.

I dig this m34 progression added that.  I figured you meant m27-29, so I did also do the change for those measures.

-m16: You don't need the tie on the G on beat 3.5 here, as there's no G to tie to in m17.

Ah oops fixed

-m18: the most nitpickiest of nitpicks: you can move the mp dynamic marking a bit up by copying m1 over to m18 :p
-m19: The L.H. note should be beamed up and the rests raised a bit, probably something left over when you were experimenting with the layers.
-m21 and 25: Maybe you could raise the quarter rests in beat 3 of the R.H. a little bit. If you've moved the notes of m29 one inversion down, this quarter rest on beat 3 will probably be able to go back down a little too.
-m22: With changing the F#'s to Gb's, I meant the L.H. too (beat 2.5)
-m23-24: The dots of the high G need to be raised so they don't clash with the notes in layer 2. Also, maybe the sharp in m24 could go a bit closer to the note too :p
-m33: Something I just thought about, maybe you could add a tenuto mark on the L.H. note, so it's extra clear the missing staccato was intentional? ^^
-m34: Maybe you can add a fermate on the rest on beat 3, so it's clear the player needs to take a little more time before repeating the song.

Added/Updated!

[Bloop]

Awesome, nice work! Then I'll approve!

[Latios212]

This is real nice! I have a few things to say here and there before we wrap up:
- Pretty sure I hear a Bb on beat 2 of m. 5 (similar to the one in m. 22)
- Do you intend for performers to play this piece with pedal? I would recommend it for the A section for sure - in which case I would suggest just removing the extra rests at the end of each fourth measure for simplicity. Those rests won't make a difference when playing on piano. Additionally, what about the second page which has a sparse, staccato left hand part but a very legato right hand part?
- The measures with the arpeggios on page 1 are a bit cluttery, with rests in a couple of different places that don't really contribute much. I would suggest simplifying them to look like this, since it's just one continuous line anyway:
You cannot view this attachment.
- When you have rolled chord symbols up against the left barline like in m. 17 and 34, I suggest using the measure tool to pad the beginning of the measure with a bit of extra space to accommodate (0.05" tends to work well for me). In measure 17 you can also just use one wavy line across both staves.

-m34: I think the R.H. arpeggio may work a bit better as an wavy line arpeggio instead of a written out arpeggio, because the 16ths end up being about twice as slow in the ritenuto than the arpeggio. You could then even write "slow arpegg." above, if you want.

I personally prefer it the other way with the arpeggio in the last measure broken up instead of written as a rolled chord it feels slow enough to me that it would be a bit clearer to write out as separate notes instead of as one chord with a performance direction, since we already have the rit. Up to you, though!

[Kricketune54]

This is real nice! I have a few things to say here and there before we wrap up:
- Pretty sure I hear a Bb on beat 2 of m. 5 (similar to the one in m. 22)

Yeah I hear this now, I hear the Bb on 3.5 as well so that is also now added.

- Do you intend for performers to play this piece with pedal? I would recommend it for the A section for sure - in which case I would suggest just removing the extra rests at the end of each fourth measure for simplicity. Those rests won't make a difference when playing on piano. Additionally, what about the second page which has a sparse, staccato left hand part but a very legato right hand part?
- The measures with the arpeggios on page 1 are a bit cluttery, with rests in a couple of different places that don't really contribute much. I would suggest simplifying them to look like this, since it's just one continuous line anyway:

I actually had put con pedale on this originally... and the hidden rests you are recommending is one I also was doing at first when I started this like a year ago lol, but opted to be more faithful to the original when I submitted.  I'm not particularly committed to it though and I can understand that it is visually detrimental to be more transcribed here when there's already a lot of arranged stuff going on elsewhere anyway.  I have updated the arrangement to be like your screenshot.

On this same point, hopefully did all the note moving okay.  I tried to keep this visual consistency even when the pitches were a little high for the bass clef.  Also because of how m.13 was, I made beat 2.0 an F#.

- When you have rolled chord symbols up against the left barline like in m. 17 and 34, I suggest using the measure tool to pad the beginning of the measure with a bit of extra space to accommodate (0.05" tends to work well for me). In measure 17 you can also just use one wavy line across both staves.

I added .5 to m17 and m34

I personally prefer it the other way with the arpeggio in the last measure broken up instead of written as a rolled chord it feels slow enough to me that it would be a bit clearer to write out as separate notes instead of as one chord with a performance direction, since we already have the rit. Up to you, though!

Kinda wish I had said this too (no offense to Bloop) because even from just a playback standpoint it sounds more accurate.  Fixed to this


Files updated!

[Latios212]

Great! Just a couple of follow up things:

- When you have rolled chord symbols up against the left barline like in m. 17 and 34, I suggest using the measure tool to pad the beginning of the measure with a bit of extra space to accommodate (0.05" tends to work well for me). In measure 17 you can also just use one wavy line across both staves.

I added .5 to m17 and m34

The measure seems rather wide with the chord still squished against the left barline. This is what I meant - adding space to the beginning of the measure without changing its width or anything through other means:

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

I would suggest just removing the extra rests at the end of each fourth measure for simplicity. Those rests won't make a difference when playing on piano.

the hidden rests you are recommending is one I also was doing at first when I started this like a year ago lol, but opted to be more faithful to the original when I submitted.  I'm not particularly committed to it though and I can understand that it is visually detrimental to be more transcribed here when there's already a lot of arranged stuff going on elsewhere anyway.

Ah, I meant to suggest filling out the measures by turning the half notes into dotted half notes. With half notes and no quarter rests it just looks like a mistake of missing the dots.

[Kricketune54]

Great! Just a couple of follow up things:
The measure seems rather wide with the chord still squished against the left barline. This is what I meant - adding space to the beginning of the measure without changing its width or anything through other means:

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

Ohhhh I just added .5 to the measure width not at the beginning specifically.  First time actually using the tool like this

Ah, I meant to suggest filling out the measures by turning the half notes into dotted half notes. With half notes and no quarter rests it just looks like a mistake of missing the dots.

Wow my comment makes no sense in hindsight.  I was actually referring to the eighth notes and making them continuous from bass to treble cleff the way they are now, not the 4th measure rests on page one.  I have fixed page 1 now in addition to the previous comment.

[Latios212]

Alrighty looks good! Just fix that midi file and we're good to go

[Kricketune54]

Okay.  The midi has been updated

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Latios212.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot