[DELETED] [N64] Star Fox 64 - "Area 6" by Fernman

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Star Fox
Game: Star Fox 64
Console: Nintendo 64
Title: Area 6
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Fernman

[Fernman]

Link to song.

Please check formatting

[XiaoMigros]

Hi! Welcome to NinSheetMusic

The way the submissions process works is community members give their feedback on others' sheets, which the arranger can implement at their own discretion. Once 2 updaters (NSM staff) give their approval to a sheet, it gets accepted and will be available on the site from the next update!

Your sheet is looking pretty good for a first submission (much better than mine lmao). However, before the updaters or anyone else goes over it in more detail, I think there are a bunch of points you can walk through on your own first:
First, you can make sure your sheet is 100% in line with the Formatting Guidelines. I can see you pretty much have the hang of it already, but there are a few small details you missed. (If you are using full Finale, I recommend copying your existing sheet into the NSM template file [linked in the Formatting Guidelines], if you're using MuseScore to import your sheets then check out this guide instead.)
After that, you can read through this guide to make sure the rhythms you use are written correctly. This helps make your sheet easier to read, and thus more likely to be played and enjoyed!

If you have any questions big or small feel free to ask here in this thread or on Discord, the community is happy to help!

[Fernman]

I have updated the files and I think I've addressed the rhythm writing and the formatting

[Fantastic Ike]

Hey, a couple things I noticed:

First off, at m2 beat 3.5, you have the 3 LH 8th notes beamed together. You can keep them that way if you want, or you can separate the beaming so that the offbeat 8th stands out. (For what it's worth I prefer the separate beaming.)

At m23 RH and elsewhere, you've got a dotted 8th note-regular 8th note with a 16th rest. This isn't an optimal pattern for that sort of rhythm: I'd recommend having a dotted 8th note-16th note with an 8th note rest. If you really want that second note to be long you can add a legato mark.

At m30 you have a double barline that...just shouldn't be there. Typically it's reserved for the end of the piece, so I don't know why that's there.

And finally, at m46 you seem to have a custom ending that's not in the original track. I know it's counter-intuitive to have a piano sheet just repeat without an actual ending, but that's typically how sheets are handled here. If you still want to write an ending then I'd recommend a measure or two at most: keep it very simple. (Trust me, I used to write endings of my own so it took me a while to get used to it too.)

Just cosmetic stuff, but then I think someone will be able to get to the actual meat of the arrangement after this

[XiaoMigros]

Just cosmetic stuff, but then I think someone will be able to get to the actual meat of the arrangement after this

I'll get to this over the next few days, but in the meantime..

First off, at m2 beat 3.5, you have the 3 LH 8th notes beamed together. You can keep them that way if you want, or you can separate the beaming so that the offbeat 8th stands out. (For what it's worth I prefer the separate beaming.)

Either way works, see what fits you better!

One more thing with how to write the rhythms: Beat 2 in the RH of m12 can be simplified to just a half note, as can any other occurences of this figure.
The rest of the rhythms (aside from the ones Fantastic Ike mentioned) look great! Good job on that.

A few more points you missed concerning the formatting:

• Your title (and header) text are missing "these markings" surrounding them
• The Composition by... text doesn't look like it's all the same font size (should be 12pt), could you check over that?
• Your page number shouldnt be bold, and should be on the same height as the header
• The header text should text-wise be the same as the title (so no game name), text size and styling are fine like you have it though

[Fernman]

Since I'm coming from Musescore over to Notepad I will wait to make those cosmetic edits. Though making changes back and forth between Musescore and notepad is starting to become a hassle. I've read the instructions on how to do it, there just has to be an easier way.

First off, at m2 beat 3.5, you have the 3 LH 8th notes beamed together. You can keep them that way if you want, or you can separate the beaming so that the offbeat 8th stands out. (For what it's worth I prefer the separate beaming.)

I will make a note to separate them.

At m23 RH and elsewhere, you've got a dotted 8th note-regular 8th note with a 16th rest. This isn't an optimal pattern for that sort of rhythm: I'd recommend having a dotted 8th note-16th note with an 8th note rest. If you really want that second note to be long you can add a legato mark.

That's a good idea, I will make note of this.

At m30 you have a double barline that...just shouldn't be there. Typically it's reserved for the end of the piece, so I don't know why that's there.

That must have formatted during the "musescore cleaner" I don't know how to get rid of that in notepad, if it's possible.

And finally, at m46 you seem to have a custom ending that's not in the original track. I know it's counter-intuitive to have a piano sheet just repeat without an actual ending, but that's typically how sheets are handled here. If you still want to write an ending then I'd recommend a measure or two at most: keep it very simple. (Trust me, I used to write endings of my own so it took me a while to get used to it too.)

I used to write endings that were just a whole note, but i find those to be just boring or even if it is two measures it can be abrupt. Since when most of us listen to a looped game song, before the song fades away the track begins again. So that is what i tried doing. Start the track again and have it end as soon as possible.

A few more points you missed concerning the formatting:

• Your title (and header) text are missing "these markings" surrounding them
• Your page number shouldnt be bold, and should be on the same height as the header

1. I understand I need to fit the formatting rules, but what is the rationale for quotation markings?
2. The page number got stripped during the Muse to Notepad conversion so I put it in manually I need to figure out what is happening.

Thanks you two, again I will get to these once the rest of the review takes place so i don't have to go back and forth between Muse and notepad so often.[/list]

[Fantastic Ike]

Since I'm coming from Musescore over to Notepad I will wait to make those cosmetic edits. Though making changes back and forth between Musescore and notepad is starting to become a hassle. I've read the instructions on how to do it, there just has to be an easier way.

Ahh, that explains it. Yeah, I do that myself and it's a hassle. Don't really have any tips though.

I used to write endings that were just a whole note, but i find those to be just boring or even if it is two measures it can be abrupt. Since when most of us listen to a looped game song, before the song fades away the track begins again. So that is what i tried doing. Start the track again and have it end as soon as possible.

Yeah, I understand. Typically we don't have actual endings to most of our sheets anyway, just wanted to let you know in advance because I'm pretty sure updaters will have you change it later.

[XiaoMigros]

1. I understand I need to fit the formatting rules, but what is the rationale for quotation markings?

I honestly have no clue, my best guess is that it is/was used to differentiate between title and not-title where it otherwise wouldn't be clear.

2. The page number got stripped during the Muse to Notepad conversion so I put it in manually I need to figure out what is happening.

Don't worry about that, we can sort that at the end like you said. So for now, let's get to the arrangement itself:

• m1: You've left out a lot of the brass parts between beats 1-4, the rhythmic figure on beat 1 is played on beats 2 and 3 as well (just with different pitches). If you want, you could combine all of that into one R.H. part so that the L.H. can play the bass notes
• m2-m3: Not only do I not hear chords in this range, but the sheet is probably better off without them: I think writing the bass and/or timpani part here is better suited. For the R.H. in m3, i hear a middle C on beat 2.
• m4: Since this is a D major chord, the Gb should be written as F#. I also think it makes sense to write the whole track in D major, so you can change the key signature as well.
• m4-5: I understand you don't want the R.H. part to be empty here, but playing D4 here seems a little too high (especially since you chose to write the higher of 2 parts in the L.H. already). I suggest you leave it empty, or maybe have the R.H. play the L.H. part and the L.H. play the bass?
• In general for the L.H. part, I don't think the first note in the repeating figure should be dotted. To me, it sounds the same length as the second notes
• m8-10 & m12-13: For the R.H. here I would use different layers/voices to include more of the brass. For m10, you can add the high G played by the brass as well, which is still fairly simple to play
• m13: In the L.H. there's a Bb which should be Bn. You might also want to consider adding courtesy accidentals for this measure

• m16-17: The chords you have here are correct, but the way you arranged them could match the original more closely. Writing the R.H. as triads, and then writing the bass line in the L.H. would be my suggestion here
• m18-21: Again, the comment about using different layers for more brass. However, it would be a little harder to play here so if you don't want to add to your current part that's okay
• m20: In the R.H. we have an E7 chord (the E is in the bass and not present in your sheet), so the Ab should be written as G#
• m22: RH: I think your simplification of the original works here, however I would sustain the Bb on beat 2 again using another voice/layer.
  L.H. I don't hear the brass part you have written here anymore, only the bass. I think the brass part returns around m30
• m23-27: I think using triads everywhere in the R.H. works better here (except in m22 and 26 obviously)
• m23 beat 4.5 RH: I hear an A here instead of Bb
• m29: There's a nice lead-in line played by the brass part I mentioned earlier which might be nice to include for a transition back to it
• m30-end: Most of what I'd have to say here is similar to what I've already said, so take my points from earlier, apply them here, and see how far you get

I have a few more things to talk about once you've worked through this, but that should be enough for now lmao
Feel free to ask if you have any questions or uncertainties!

[Fernman]

• m1: You've left out a lot of the brass parts between beats 1-4, the rhythmic figure on beat 1 is played on beats 2 and 3 as well (just with different pitches). If you want, you could combine all of that into one R.H. part so that the L.H. can play the bass notes

Yes I considered that, and although that is true in the OST, when one hears it and remembers it they just hear the m1 as I arranged it. If I add the baseline I feel that you would lose that thrill of hearing that intro before getting into the baseline. It gets lost with the baseline.

• m2-m3: Not only do I not hear chords in this range, but the sheet is probably better off without them: I think writing the bass and/or timpani part here is better suited. For the R.H. in m3, i hear a middle C on beat 2.

Correct there are no chords in that range in the base, they are actually an octave lower, I brought them up since if they were any lower I think it would bring down the song.

• m4: Since this is a D major chord, the Gb should be written as F#. I also think it makes sense to write the whole track in D major, so you can change the key signature as well.

I don't disagree with you on changing the Key signature, I just don't understand enough music theory to feel comfortable making that change. and not understanding what else that impacts. The notes themselves won't change, in a way, but I'm sure there is more too it. Is there somewhere I can learn more?

• m4-5: I understand you don't want the R.H. part to be empty here, but playing D4 here seems a little too high (especially since you chose to write the higher of 2 parts in the L.H. already). I suggest you leave it empty, or maybe have the R.H. play the L.H. part and the L.H. play the bass?

I agree with removing the D4

• In general for the L.H. part, I don't think the first note in the repeating figure should be dotted. To me, it sounds the same length as the second notes

Per the MIDI Rip it has a dotted first note, followed by two tied eights notes, the last of which is dotted, followed by a stacatto'd quarter. So they do sound very similar.  I know you've said never trust a MIDI rip, but I don't see any harm in leaving this the way it is.

• m8-10 & m12-13: For the R.H. here I would use different layers/voices to include more of the brass. For m10, you can add the high G played by the brass as well, which is still fairly simple to play

My hand reach is an octave, playing said octave is doable, but adding more notes to the mix or moving with octaves is not in my current skill range.
I want to make this a playable song. Adding the high G in m10 is not preferred. As for the rest I think I'm missing a few notes in between, but I within one instrument (piano) I think would make too much movement and lose the feel of the song.

• m13: In the L.H. there's a Bb which should be Bn. You might also want to consider adding courtesy accidentals for this measure

I fixed the Bn

• m16-17: The chords you have here are correct, but the way you arranged them could match the original more closely. Writing the R.H. as triads, and then writing the bass line in the L.H. would be my suggestion here

I'll add the triads, but for the most part the baseline matches the right hand. The timpani is in the background, but it isn't as noticeable.

• m18-21: Again, the comment about using different layers for more brass. However, it would be a little harder to play here so if you don't want to add to your current part that's okay

Correct I want to make it playable.

• m20: In the R.H. we have an E7 chord (the E is in the bass and not present in your sheet), so the Ab should be written as G#

I left out the E in the left hand to A) give time to get to the lower section and B) it is more a more dramatic entrance.

• m22: RH: I think your simplification of the original works here, however I would sustain the Bb on beat 2 again using another voice/layer.
  L.H. I don't hear the brass part you have written here anymore, only the bass. I think the brass part returns around m30

I don't disagree with the holding the Bb, I'm just not use to playing with different voices even though that is within reach. Trying it out just now the fingering is very difficult and I want this to be playable to a typical player.
LH: I am not sure what you aren't hearing. The melody breaks in two just like in the beginning and the bass is apparent. The LH bass section was an octave lower, I just brought it up an octave.

• m23-27: I think using triads everywhere in the R.H. works better here (except in m22 and 26 obviously)

Playing triads with the dotted eight/sixteenth note rythm is a bit of a challenge. I'm sure it can be done with enough practice, I just want it to playable. So I rather leave it out then have it be "perfect" I probably will add triads to 24 and 25 whole notes.

• m23 beat 4.5 RH: I hear an A here instead of Bb

Fixed.

• m29: There's a nice lead-in line played by the brass part I mentioned earlier which might be nice to include for a transition back to it

I hear it, I just feel it sounds interjected and is out of place. Either the RH whole note is lost and we pick something else up or the bass pattern is lost. And no, I am not doing multiple voices.

I have  reviewed M30+ and other than the dotted quarter notes, I think you are drawing my attention to the background brass particularly starting in measures 34. If I were to include those in, the song would feel like its trying to do too much at once. Focusing on just the core aspect of it will keep it playable and keep the spirit of the composition. I think I've addressed the previous formatting findings.

[XiaoMigros]

Yes I considered that, and although that is true in the OST, when one hears it and remembers it they just hear the m1 as I arranged it. If I add the baseline I feel that you would lose that thrill of hearing that intro before getting into the baseline. It gets lost with the baseline.

Fair enough, but in that case we should make sure what you have written there is actually present in the original:

• m2 L.H: I don't hear any Ds here
• m3 L.H: I don't hear any chords in this measure other than C
• m4 L.H. I don't hear the F#

Correct there are no chords in that range in the base, they are actually an octave lower, I brought them up since if they were any lower I think it would bring down the song.

Again I strongly suggest this be changed, I really don't think Bb2 and C3 are that low.

I don't disagree with you on changing the Key signature, I just don't understand enough music theory to feel comfortable making that change. and not understanding what else that impacts. The notes themselves won't change, in a way, but I'm sure there is more too it. Is there somewhere I can learn more?

That's okay! It's definitely not an easy example to determine the keysig from.
There's some elements of music theory behind it (for example, the intro very clearly leads into D, and we stay in D for a while after that), but also a lot of my 'reasoning' is just my gut feeling. There are also a lot of places where the felt key signature changes, I'm just not sure that's worth specifying (constantly changing key signature is unhelpful and annoying).
As for learning more, you can do what I did to learn by looking at other sheet music and trying to spot patterns in it. It's even more helpful if you can listen to the original and read along on the sheet. While there are some rules to determine the key signature which work fine in 80% of cases, the remaining 20% is much more difficult to exclusively define. That, unfortunately, means training your gut feeling, which takes time. Maybe some others have some more concrete tips though..

Per the MIDI Rip it has a dotted first note, followed by two tied eights notes, the last of which is dotted, followed by a stacatto'd quarter. So they do sound very similar.  I know you've said never trust a MIDI rip, but I don't see any harm in leaving this the way it is.

It's not that I don't trust midi rips per se, it's just that I work a lot with them, and know what mistakes notation programs make when importing them. They round certain durations, and they always round up in note length and not down. But yes, at NSM we tend to prioritise what we actually hear over what a midi rip says.
That aside, I think writing these dotted quarters as regular quarters makes more sense from a pianistical view too, as it creates a less uneven feel.

My hand reach is an octave, playing said octave is doable, but adding more notes to the mix or moving with octaves is not in my current skill range.
I want to make this a playable song. Adding the high G in m10 is not preferred. As for the rest I think I'm missing a few notes in between, but I within one instrument (piano) I think would make too much movement and lose the feel of the song.

Regardless, I think you are best writing this in 2 voices/layers even if you don't add more notes to it, it just makes it clear to the performer what exactly is going on.

I'll add the triads, but for the most part the baseline matches the right hand. The timpani is in the background, but it isn't as noticeable.

I agree the timpani isn't as audible, but there's another bass part that I think is worth including (rather than adding a part that doesn't exist)

I left out the E in the left hand to A) give time to get to the lower section and B) it is more a more dramatic entrance.

Ah sorry, I wasn't clear enough here. I wasn't trying to say you should add the E to your sheet, I was just explaining why the Ab in the R.H. should be G#. That's fixed now though, so all is well

I don't disagree with the holding the Bb, I'm just not use to playing with different voices even though that is within reach. Trying it out just now the fingering is very difficult and I want this to be playable to a typical player.

I'm far from a skilled player but I've tested this and I could play it perfectly fine after 3 tries. Again, I will suggest changing this (as many other sheets on site use layers/voices in a similar fashion)

LH: I am not sure what you aren't hearing. The melody breaks in two just like in the beginning and the bass is apparent. The LH bass section was an octave lower, I just brought it up an octave.

The bass in this track consists of 3 parts: One is in a tenor-ish range, which you have written in the L.H. from m4-15 and m30-47. Another one plays octaves in the low bass range (think tuba), and the last part is the timpani. The first 2 parts I mentioned are quite difficult to discern from one another, but I hear a drop in intensity around m18 and can't hear the first part anymore after that (until m29/30 as I mentioned last post). Hence why I said I don't hear your L.H. part in the original anymore, I don't hear these chords that you have written in the sheet.

Playing triads with the dotted eight/sixteenth note rythm is a bit of a challenge. I'm sure it can be done with enough practice, I just want it to playable. So I rather leave it out then have it be "perfect" I probably will add triads to 24 and 25 whole notes.

That's a fair compromise

I hear it, I just feel it sounds interjected and is out of place. Either the RH whole note is lost and we pick something else up or the bass pattern is lost.

I meant this as a transition between the low bass part (the one I mention 2 points up) back to the high bass part. The bass pattern would be lost, yes, I just thought it would be a nice touch

I have  reviewed M30+ and other than the dotted quarter notes, I think you are drawing my attention to the background brass particularly starting in measures 34. If I were to include those in, the song would feel like its trying to do too much at once. Focusing on just the core aspect of it will keep it playable and keep the spirit of the composition. I think I've addressed the previous formatting findings.

I understand that! I was more referring to the things I've brought up in this post again, speak the dotted quarters and using more than one voice/layer.

[Fernman]

Fair enough, but in that case we should make sure what you have written there is actually present in the original:

• m2 L.H: I don't hear any Ds here
• m3 L.H: I don't hear any chords in this measure other than C
• m4 L.H. I don't hear the F#

1. I'm assuming you mean that there aren't any D's present in the sheet music. The D is held over from measure 1, but since its in the LH, I can't reach an octave since there is a D in the LH already.
2. I'm assuming you mean in the RH you hear the C chord, In the LH there is only the C3 and C2 octave. Instead of playing that low making the RH octave one lower seemed to be fitting.
3. I won't disagree that you don't hear it, but it is in the MIDI Rip, Musically, if this is a D major chord then is there any harm in including it?

Again I strongly suggest this be changed, I really don't think Bb2 and C3 are that low.

I disagree, the rest of the song is above C3 so if it were to move down it would give a weird, deep, and uneasy entrance that is inconsistent with the rest of the piano arrangment. It may sound great in the OST, but adapted for the Piano it sounds out of place when the rest of the song is higher.

That aside, I think writing these dotted quarters as regular quarters makes more sense from a pianistical view too, as it creates a less uneven feel.

Ok, I've though it through and agree. It does make it easier to count and coordinate as well.

Regardless, I think you are best writing this in 2 voices/layers even if you don't add more notes to it, it just makes it clear to the performer what exactly is going on.

I'll go along with this one.

I agree the timpani isn't as audible, but there's another bass part that I think is worth including (rather than adding a part that doesn't exist)

If we are talking about m16 and m17, I slowed down the OST and I could only hear the chord progression as written. I don't hear anything else.

I'm far from a skilled player but I've tested this and I could play it perfectly fine after 3 tries. Again, I will suggest changing this (as many other sheets on site use layers/voices in a similar fashion)

You must have a larger reach than I because I couldn't do that. While I understand ninsheet's has a high standard, I try to make my sheets playable to the typical player. I'll concede on this even though I'm not sure it makes as much of an auditory difference when one remembers the song they remember the lower repeat.

The bass in this track consists of 3 parts: One is in a tenor-ish range, which you have written in the L.H. from m4-15 and m30-47. Another one plays octaves in the low bass range (think tuba), and the last part is the timpani. The first 2 parts I mentioned are quite difficult to discern from one another, but I hear a drop in intensity around m18 and can't hear the first part anymore after that (until m29/30 as I mentioned last post). Hence why I said I don't hear your L.H. part in the original anymore, I don't hear these chords that you have written in the sheet.

If we are still talking m22, the Tuba, i suppose, is playing an a2 and a1 octave. That is WAY too low and it doesn't fit with the rest of the arrangement. So I brought it up an octave and to make it more fitting with the rest of the arrangement I added a harmonic note beneath the A3 to make it appear fuller. It is fitting and in the spirit of the song even though one doesn't hear those exact notes per say.

I meant this as a transition between the low bass part (the one I mention 2 points up) back to the high bass part. The bass pattern would be lost, yes, I just thought it would be a nice touch

I won't disagree, but the bass pattern is what keeps the song going.

I understand that! I was more referring to the things I've brought up in this post again, speak the dotted quarters and using more than one voice/layer.

Even IF there was another layer in M34 (and onward) it would make it more difficult to get to the middle C in M35 on time. At this point the performer should understand the voicing in prior sections and be able to incorporate if they see fit in this section. I'd rather keep it optional.

As for the upload the Tie on the Bb in m22-23 broke upon conversion. I'll need some someone to fix that, unless it's do-able in notepad.

Thanks for the feedback!

[XiaoMigros]

1. I'm assuming you mean that there aren't any D's present in the sheet music. The D is held over from measure 1, but since its in the LH, I can't reach an octave since there is a D in the LH already.

I'm referring to the repeated Ds in the LH

2. I'm assuming you mean in the RH you hear the C chord, In the LH there is only the C3 and C2 octave. Instead of playing that low making the RH octave one lower seemed to be fitting.

In the PDF you had Fns in the LH which confused me (I thought there were Gbs like you had in other parts of the sheet). Downloaded the MUS file and it's En there, so all is well

3. I won't disagree that you don't hear it, but it is in the MIDI Rip, Musically, if this is a D major chord then is there any harm in including it?

At NinSheetMusic we advise against basing arrangement choices off of midi rips, and prioritise what we can hear in the original. I agree, musically it doesn't make a huge diffence, but accuracy should (when feasible) be prioritised.

If we are talking about m16 and m17, I slowed down the OST and I could only hear the chord progression as written. I don't hear anything else.

Your sheet already includes the last 3 notes of what I mean, there's a bass line that starts on G2 and ascends from there.

You must have a larger reach than I because I couldn't do that. While I understand ninsheet's has a high standard, I try to make my sheets playable to the typical player. I'll concede on this even though I'm not sure it makes as much of an auditory difference when one remembers the song they remember the lower repeat.

Players always have the option not to sustain the notes in other voices for their full duration (as is often implied in other pieces of sheet music)

If we are still talking m22, the Tuba, i suppose, is playing an a2 and a1 octave. That is WAY too low and it doesn't fit with the rest of the arrangement. So I brought it up an octave and to make it more fitting with the rest of the arrangement I added a harmonic note beneath the A3 to make it appear fuller. It is fitting and in the spirit of the song even though one doesn't hear those exact notes per say.

I think adding in the harmonic notes here is a little too liberal of an approach. What do you think of using full octaves instead? That would get the difference in sound across better.

I won't disagree, but the bass pattern is what keeps the song going.

Just a suggestion, no worries :p

Even IF there was another layer in M34 (and onward) it would make it more difficult to get to the middle C in M35 on time. At this point the performer should understand the voicing in prior sections and be able to incorporate if they see fit in this section. I'd rather keep it optional.

What do you think of something like this? I feel like it gets the message across without messing with actual note durations

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

As for the upload the Tie on the Bb in m22-23 broke upon conversion. I'll need some someone to fix that, unless it's do-able in notepad.

For this (and my point above, if you wish) you can use the tie tool (in my notepad its between the tuplet and accidentals tools)

[Fernman]

I'm referring to the repeated Ds in the LH

That would be the Timpani in m2 I presume. I prefer to omit and keep it and stay with the melody. It keeps the arrangement playable

At NinSheetMusic we advise against basing arrangement choices off of midi rips, and prioritise what we can hear in the original. I agree, musically it doesn't make a huge diffence, but accuracy should (when feasible) be prioritised.

Just for you I'll remove it.

Your sheet already includes the last 3 notes of what I mean, there's a bass line that starts on G2 and ascends from there.

If we are talking about the timpani section I rather not include it and just keep it as written via the audible chord progression. It keeps the music playable.

Players always have the option not to sustain the notes in other voices for their full duration (as is often implied in other pieces of sheet music)

That may be true, but there is nothing more satisfying than playing everything on the page as written. If someone wants to add more to it what a bonus!

I think adding in the harmonic notes here is a little too liberal of an approach. What do you think of using full octaves instead? That would get the difference in sound across better.

I listened to it on the octaves, I just think it brings down the feeling of the song too much. I interpret the song as light and peppy as this is the final push to break through the space armada in the game, and the sustained repeated A octave doesn't bring me that cheer. In m30-34 it gets into that low range briefly, but it's offset by the higher notes in the RH. I prefer the harmonics that keeps positive bass feeling the same throughout the song.

What do you think of something like this? I feel like it gets the message across without messing with actual note durations

Personally, I don't like a tie just "hanging out" there not being tied to anything.
In notepad apparently I don't know how to select notes. I can't edit that Bb or put a tie on it. The selector tool only selects the measure....

[XiaoMigros]

That would be the Timpani in m2 I presume. I prefer to omit and keep it and stay with the melody. It keeps the arrangement playable

I don't understand what you mean, I'm saying those Ds should be removed because I don't think they're present in the original

If we are talking about the timpani section I rather not include it and just keep it as written via the audible chord progression. It keeps the music playable.

Replacing what you have written with a 1-note bassline is definitely more easy to play

In notepad apparently I don't know how to select notes. I can't edit that Bb or put a tie on it. The selector tool only selects the measure....

Notepad (and Finale in general) use a select change-> apply to score system (rather than musescore's select on score -> apply changes system). First you have to choose the tie tool (and make sure none of the note options are selected) and then click on the note you want to tie from. Hope that helps