[ARCADE] Mappy - "Main Theme" by LeviR.star

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: Mappy
Console: Arcade
Title: Main Theme
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: LeviR.star

[attachment deleted by admin]

[LeviR.star]

Out of all the iconic arcade themes missing from the site, this one was probably the most sorely needed.

[Kricketune54]

This sounds familiar, but I don't believe I've ever heard of this game!

Formatting
- I don't think it would hurt to move both the tempo marking and the mf dynamic at the beginning slightly to the right
- The "To Coda" text is a tiny bit outside the margin, so move it slightly to the left
- Maybe an updater could make a judgement call on this - but I think it might make sense to indent the coda section.  Given the formatting of the sheet as it currently is though perhaps this is not conducive

Notes
- Not really a correction, but what was the reasoning for the second pitch choices for tremolos?  It works well and kind of remind me of trills; my first inclination if arranging this would've been to go between octaves of the same note but I think this works better
- m28 LH beat 3 the C# quarter note should actually be two eighths
- m32 RH I don't hear the F# held, but I do hear it played the same length as the D in the LH
- m36 LH beat 4 should be G# and E, both as eighth notes
- m37-38 LH are the pitches on beats 2-4 additions from that chord channel (i.e. playing C-E on those beats) to fill out this section? What are your thoughts on adding the E above the C's on those beats?
- m38 RH beat 4.5 I hear this G tying over to beat 1 of the next measure
- m39 LH I do not hear this part, rather that if the same channel pitches are being represented, the line should be G-F#-E-D

[LeviR.star]

Thanks Kricketune, I made edits based on several of your points. Here's the ones I don't agree with, however:

- I don't think it would hurt to move both the tempo marking and the mf dynamic at the beginning slightly to the right
- m36 LH beat 4 should be G# and E, both as eighth notes
- m37-38 LH are the pitches on beats 2-4 additions from that chord channel (i.e. playing C-E on those beats) to fill out this section? What are your thoughts on adding the E above the C's on those beats?
- m38 RH beat 4.5 I hear this G tying over to beat 1 of the next measure
- m39 LH I do not hear this part, rather that if the same channel pitches are being represented, the line should be G-F#-E-D

- in my opinion, they're fine where they are
- sorry, I don't hear that; I think you might be hearing two intersecting lines at once. For future reference, I'm citing the NES version, which has the same exact music, minus the additional channels
- I'd prefer not to introduce that part so late into the piece, only for it to be played for two bars
- this is kind of a subjective thing too, eh? I'd like to notate it cutting off before the next bar
- here's another part I had trouble transcribing, so again, I consulted the NES version. Normally, I wouldn't do this for arcade-to-console conversions, but Namco's musicians replicated their work with a surprising level of accuracy, and I'm happy to provide several examples

[Kricketune54]

I appreciate you linking the NES version to this

- in my opinion, they're fine where they are

Might just be my personal alignment biases then lol

- sorry, I don't hear that; I think you might be hearing two intersecting lines at once. For future reference, I'm citing the NES version, which has the same exact music, minus the additional channels

I agree with you on this, I definitely was hearing those chord notes that are exclusive in the arcade version

- I'd prefer not to introduce that part so late into the piece, only for it to be played for two bars

Makes sense, and I'll give it that beats 2 and 4 are obviously there in the NES version and its just really hard to make them out in this arcade version

- this is kind of a subjective thing too, eh? I'd like to notate it cutting off before the next bar

Yeah this is another instance where the NES version is really clear, but the arcade version is not so much, at least to me. Still hearing that version as carrying over but I don't think it really is necessary to have the tie to beat 1 anyway

- here's another part I had trouble transcribing, so again, I consulted the NES version. Normally, I wouldn't do this for arcade-to-console conversions, but Namco's musicians replicated their work with a surprising level of accuracy, and I'm happy to provide several examples

This really does not sound the same between the arcade and NES versions.  Perhaps keep it as you have so both hands aren't playing the same notes at different octaves but from a pure accuracy standpoint I don't hear this m39 LH line as is

[LeviR.star]

This really does not sound the same between the arcade and NES versions.  Perhaps keep it as you have so both hands aren't playing the same notes at different octaves but from a pure accuracy standpoint I don't hear this m39 LH line as is

Okay, I'll admit I wanted to eliminate the unison motion in the two separate parts and referenced the latter version to achieve this, but it wasn't right of me, so I'll change it back. Files updated again.

[Libera]

One question from me.  If you want to leave out all of the parts from the arcade version (in most places), why are you arranging the arcade version rather than the NES version?  I'm just a little confused at the moment behind the rationale for the sheet.

-The main thing that stood out to me is how out of tune this is (and the amount it's out of tune doesn't seem consistent either...) I found a different version that had it more in tune (but that version was in Gb/F# rather than G) and it may have been fan de-de-tuned.  I guess if there is no other information than this makes more sense than F# if only because it is easier to read this way.  One of the notes that is really weird though is the Cn in the left hand of bar 34.  It almost sounds like it's so flat that it sounds like a Cn, but I think it may have meant to be a C#.  It's either the most out of tune note in the piece, or the least out of tune and I don't know how to tell which...
-Does the piece not loop at the end?
-This is perhaps a little subjective, but I feel like the an E might sound better as the added harmony rather than a C in bar 4/44.  The C sounds a little dark in comparison I think.
-The left hand part in bars 13-20 almost sounds like it isn't swung, though it is kind of hard to tell since it only applies to two notes.

[LeviR.star]

- One question from me.  If you want to leave out all of the parts from the arcade version (in most places), why are you arranging the arcade version rather than the NES version?  I'm just a little confused at the moment behind the rationale for the sheet.
-The main thing that stood out to me is how out of tune this is (and the amount it's out of tune doesn't seem consistent either...) I found a different version that had it more in tune (but that version was in Gb/F# rather than G) and it may have been fan de-de-tuned.  I guess if there is no other information than this makes more sense than F# if only because it is easier to read this way.  One of the notes that is really weird though is the Cn in the left hand of bar 34.  It almost sounds like it's so flat that it sounds like a Cn, but I think it may have meant to be a C#.  It's either the most out of tune note in the piece, or the least out of tune and I don't know how to tell which...
-Does the piece not loop at the end?

- which parts from the former am I leaving out that I shouldn't? The way I see it, I'm using the NES version as a basis (because two channels) while adding stuff from the arcade version that I can afford to shove into a two-hand keyboard solo
- nearly every re-release of this game keeps the song in G, so I imagine it was the composer's intent all along. Not sure why it sounds so de-tuned though
- I'm going purely off of rips from the game files; you listened to the end of each YouTube source, right? Both of them cut the music off where I marked, and circumstances in which the game loops it are uncommon; if you take too long to clear a stage, an enemy called a "Gosenzo Coin" drops down and kills you. What with the D.C. al Coda already on the sheet, I don't want to complicate things by asking the performer to repeat from the beginning, but maybe we can figure something out

[Libera]

- which parts from the former am I leaving out that I shouldn't? The way I see it, I'm using the NES version as a basis (because two channels) while adding stuff from the arcade version that I can afford to shove into a two-hand keyboard solo

I guess the things that stuck out the most to me were the rhythms in bar 12 and the section beginning at bar 25, where we lose a lot of rhythm in some bars.

- I'm going purely off of rips from the game files; you listened to the end of each YouTube source, right? Both of them cut the music off where I marked, and circumstances in which the game loops it are uncommon; if you take too long to clear a stage, an enemy called a "Gosenzo Coin" drops down and kills you. What with the D.C. al Coda already on the sheet, I don't want to complicate things by asking the performer to repeat from the beginning, but maybe we can figure something out

It certainly sounds like it should loop though.  Is it uncommon for it to loop, or impossible?  There's a big difference.  If it categorically doesn't loop in-game, then sure this is fine, but if it can do (even if it is unlikely) then we should have the loop written in the sheet.

-This is perhaps a little subjective, but I feel like the an E might sound better as the added harmony rather than a C in bar 4/44.  The C sounds a little dark in comparison I think.
-The left hand part in bars 13-20 almost sounds like it isn't swung, though it is kind of hard to tell since it only applies to two notes.

You didn't respond to either of these points.

[LeviR.star]

You didn't respond to either of these points.

I was waiting to address them once I got the newly-edited files ready, please be patient. Now:

- you're right, this is subjective. I think the tremolo in m. 4 & 44 sounds better on a minor sixth, a minor flavoring does not always make a chord "dark". Going further, I'd argue that a fourth doesn't sound consonant enough for the setting, but again, that's just my opinion; fourths can be considered consonant or dissonant depending on the context, and I'd rather not make it ambiguous here
- mmm, it seems a unnecessary to notate straight eighths for a single beat in two separate bars, doesn't it? How about we "streamline" it, and keep it as-is?

It certainly sounds like it should loop though.  Is it uncommon for it to loop, or impossible?  There's a big difference.  If it categorically doesn't loop in-game, then sure this is fine, but if it can do (even if it is unlikely) then we should have the loop written in the sheet.

Okay, I see your point. Here's what I'll do:

- first, I'll add a double barline at m. 52 and mark it as an "optional ending", since it's a nice spot to conclude a performance
- next, I'll instruct the player to "repeat from beginning" at m. 56, which they'll do if they want the piece to loop like it does in-game
- finally, I'll make sure the playback ends at m. 52 on the second pass

This will require some playback wizardry for m. 12 to get it to repeat properly, but the end result will produce a MIDI that is two minutes and forty-seven seconds long.

I guess the things that stuck out the most to me were the rhythms in bar 12 and the section beginning at bar 25, where we lose a lot of rhythm in some bars.

- for m. 12, I want to think what you're hearing is the clashing between parts, one of which I've excluded from the sheet for simplicity's sake
- for everything else, where it sounds like it stops swinging for a singular beat, again, I don't think this is worth notating. I assume this is what you're talking about, but it's hard to tell because you're coming off as a little vague


Files have been updated.

[Libera]

I was waiting to address them once I got the newly-edited files ready, please be patient.

There's no need to be condescending.  How am I supposed to know that you're waiting until later if you don't say anything about it in your post?

Okay, I see your point. Here's what I'll do:

- first, I'll add a double barline at m. 52 and mark it as an "optional ending", since it's a nice spot to conclude a performance
- next, I'll instruct the player to "repeat from beginning" at m. 56, which they'll do if they want the piece to loop like it does in-game
- finally, I'll make sure the playback ends at m. 52 on the second pass

This will require some playback wizardry for m. 12 to get it to repeat properly, but the end result will produce a MIDI that is two minutes and forty-seven seconds long.

This looks great now.

- for m. 12, I want to think what you're hearing is the clashing between parts, one of which I've excluded from the sheet for simplicity's sake

I don't think so.  It sounds like the other part is playing on beats 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5, which doesn't come through in the sheet.  It seems very doable to put it in though.

- for everything else, where it sounds like it stops swinging for a singular beat, again, I don't think this is worth notating. I assume this is what you're talking about, but it's hard to tell because you're coming off as a little vague

I'm referring to the part you have omitted in 25+, which is what you asked me about.  In bar 31-32, for example, your sheet makes it look like the only thing that is playing is the melody for beats 2 of 31 through beat 3 of bar 32, but the original has the other part which is playing throughout that section.  This is the sort of thing I'm referring to when I say that there is rhythm missing from your sheet, based on the arcade version.

I think it's clear how this comes about based on how you said you arranged this:

The way I see it, I'm using the NES version as a basis (because two channels) while adding stuff from the arcade version that I can afford to shove into a two-hand keyboard solo

But I don't think this is the most natural way for a piano arrangement of this version of the track to look.  It looks like an arrangement of the NES version with a couple of references to the arcade version, which isn't really ideal.  If you want to submit an arrangement of the NES version, go ahead, but if you want to submit an arrangement of the arcade version, I think the primary reference should be that version.

[LeviR.star]

I don't think so. It sounds like the other part is playing on beats 2.5, 3.5 and 4.5, which doesn't come through in the sheet. It seems very doable to put it in though.

Doable, yes, but transcribing the inner layer verbatim obscures the melody. Is this what you're hearing?

You cannot view this attachment.

... because I could always hear those off-beats, but I only included the on-beats because they line up with the other two parts without getting in the way.

I'm referring to the part you have omitted in 25+, which is what you asked me about. In bar 31-32, for example, your sheet makes it look like the only thing that is playing is the melody for beats 2 of 31 through beat 3 of bar 32, but the original has the other part which is playing throughout that section. This is the sort of thing I'm referring to when I say that there is rhythm missing from your sheet, based on the arcade version. I think it's clear how this comes about based on how you said you arranged this, but I don't think this is the most natural way for a piano arrangement of this version of the track to look. It looks like an arrangement of the NES version with a couple of references to the arcade version, which isn't really ideal. If you want to submit an arrangement of the NES version, go ahead, but if you want to submit an arrangement of the arcade version, I think the primary reference should be that version.

I'm not going to submit an arrangement of the NES version, there's no need. How about this:

You cannot view this attachment.

It's certainly asking more of the performer now, but it satisfies the rhythmic intricacies that were missing in earlier drafts. If I finished off the section in this manner, would you approve?

EDIT: And just so you know, there's a reason I didn't write it this way before. The example I produced for m. 25 may look passable, but applying the same process to the next two measures doesn't work nearly as well, I've tried.

[Libera]

Doable, yes, but transcribing the inner layer verbatim obscures the melody. Is this what you're hearing?

You cannot view this attachment.

... because I could always hear those off-beats, but I only included the on-beats because they line up with the other two parts without getting in the way.

My point is that the rhythm isn't coming across properly in the sheet.  I don't really think it obscures the melody since the higher notes don't appear at the same time as the current layer 1, but if you really don't like it then fair enough.

How about this:

You cannot view this attachment.

It's certainly asking more of the performer now, but it satisfies the rhythmic intricacies that were missing in earlier drafts. If I finished off the section in this manner, would you approve?

EDIT: And just so you know, there's a reason I didn't write it this way before. The example I produced for m. 25 may look passable, but applying the same process to the next two measures doesn't work nearly as well, I've tried.

Yeah that looks cool.  I would have thought that the same sort of thing would work in the other bars too.  Like this? (ignore the articulations).

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

The really important bit though is in 31-32, where currently the left hand disappears for 5 beats.  There's also some extra stuff that could go in bars 37-38 etc. fairly easily.

[LeviR.star]

Yeah that looks cool.  I would have thought that the same sort of thing would work in the other bars too.  Like this? (ignore the articulations).

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

The really important bit though is in 31-32, where currently the left hand disappears for 5 beats.  There's also some extra stuff that could go in bars 37-38 etc. fairly easily.

I like the way you've written that, and I'll be keeping it. On the current files I'm updating with, I've tried my best to make it playable, while following the basic rules of voice leading to a reasonable level. Measures 28, 35, and 39 may still be a little suspect, but I'm out of ideas and willing to guess they're the best course of action, up to you. One thing's for sure: they're sounding a lot better now, nice and full. Thanks for the feedback, new draft is up.

Today (4/28) is not a great day for me to make last-minute changes, but I've got the following time slots open (Central Daylight Time):

12:30 to 1:00 (during which time I'd normally eat lunch)
4-ish to 6:30
9-ish to Bedtime

Leave a post here, ping me in #submissions, or do both, and I'll address the feedback when I can. If they're small enough edits, I'll give the updating team permission to make changes to the files in my stead. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to get 3 1/2 hours of sleep.

[Libera]

I like the way you've written that, and I'll be keeping it. On the current files I'm updating with, I've tried my best to make it playable, while following the basic rules of voice leading to a reasonable level. Measures 28, 35, and 39 may still be a little suspect, but I'm out of ideas and willing to guess they're the best course of action, up to you. One thing's for sure: they're sounding a lot better now, nice and full. Thanks for the feedback, new draft is up.

That looks great.  Exactly the sort of thing I was envisioning.  The bars you mentioned look fine to me; the reasonable adjustments you have made keep the rhythm and the feel intact without having everything overlapping horribly.

Happy to approve.