[NDS] Pokémon Ranger: Guardian Signs - "Ending Theme" by Naturematthe

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Pokémon
Game: Pokémon Ranger: Guardian Signs
Console: Nintendo DS
Title: Ending Theme
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Naturematthe

[XiaoMigros]

Hi! Welcome to the submissions side of NSM

When submitting, it's helpful to provide some sort of link (usually YouTube) to the track you arranged, like so:

I haven't had time to look through your arrangement yet, but if I do I'll leave some feedback for you.

[Kricketune54]

Hey Naturematthe, wanted to just leave a quick comment regarding formatting. I'm not sure what template you used to make this arrangement but please see the site's formatting guidelines here: https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?topic=481.0. There is a template file formatted the way that your arrangement will need to be (I think you can just copy and paste your sheet into this template in Finale and should be mostly good to go aside from unbolting the tempo bpm number).

I also saw that someone already submitted a sheet from this game before, we try to keep credits consistent in the bottom copyright info so please update that as well! https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/4910 is the sheet

Some actual feedback as well:

 • I'm hearing the sextuplet in m2 slightly differently, did you write it like this for playability reasons? (screenshot of what I hear)

Spoiler

[close]

• m4, m8 LH beat 4 these E's are technically an octave lower, and could be written as such
• m7 RH top layer beat 1 is a 16th note, and there's a B on beat 1.25 (between the G# and E)
• m8 RH lower layer the G#-E on beat 4 is restruck as an 8th note on beat 4.5
• m11 RH lower layer sounds like this:

Spoiler

[close]

• m16 RH beat 2.75 the F# should be an E
• m16 LH beat 3 you could add a staccato to the E (it is slightly shorter than notes following it)
• m20 RH beat 2.75 don't hear the D# in this chord, and I think C# is more appropriate
• m23 RH beat 4 not hearing an F#, but could replace with a C# (heard) next to the upper D#.

[Kricketune54]

Just posting here, had PM'ed Naturematthe about working on this submission and responding to the feedback, he said he has been having some trouble accessing the site but I think he'll be responding at some point 

[Naturematthe]

Hello everyone,

thank you for the feedback! I revised the score based on your suggestions, plus a few other things I noticed in the process.

Hey Naturematthe, wanted to just leave a quick comment regarding formatting. I'm not sure what template you used to make this arrangement but please see the site's formatting guidelines here: https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/forum/index.php?topic=481.0. There is a template file formatted the way that your arrangement will need to be (I think you can just copy and paste your sheet into this template in Finale and should be mostly good to go aside from unbolting the tempo bpm number).

I also saw that someone already submitted a sheet from this game before, we try to keep credits consistent in the bottom copyright info so please update that as well! https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/4910 is the sheet

Done both.

• I'm hearing the sextuplet in m2 slightly differently, did you write it like this for playability reasons? (screenshot of what I hear)

Spoiler

[close]

• m4, m8 LH beat 4 these E's are technically an octave lower, and could be written as such
• m7 RH top layer beat 1 is a 16th note, and there's a B on beat 1.25 (between the G# and E)
• m8 RH lower layer the G#-E on beat 4 is restruck as an 8th note on beat 4.5

Agreeing with those, changed them.

• m11 RH lower layer sounds like this:

Spoiler

[close]

I heard that too when you pointed it out, but I also heard some E's on the offbeats. I added them too.

• m16 RH beat 2.75 the F# should be an E
• m16 LH beat 3 you could add a staccato to the E (it is slightly shorter than notes following it)
• m20 RH beat 2.75 don't hear the D# in this chord, and I think C# is more appropriate
• m23 RH beat 4 not hearing an F#, but could replace with a C# (heard) next to the upper D#.

Added those as well, except for m20. I took out the D# but didn't add a C# since I personally didn't hear that either. Changed the similar part a little bit later the same way.

Additionally I changed a few other things I noticed:
• Set down some left-hand notes by an octave to better reflect the bass line from the original (like you suggested for m4 and m8)
• m59 and following I shortened the dotted quarters in the melody to quarters plus eighth rests
• Added a few staccatos in addition to the ones you suggested

I'm still not entirely sure about m33 and following as I'm afraid to trade the playability for more accuracy there.

Should I replace the files from my submission with the revised ones or provide those separately?

[Kricketune54]

Should I replace the files from my submission with the revised ones or provide those separately?

Yep! The way the submissions system works is updaters give feedback for the submitted sheet's files. When the person submitting implements and responds to that feedback, they also update the files so we can see what has changed.

Files can be replaced by clicking the edit button (pencil) in the NSM Panel where you can view your submissions, and uploading new versions of the files to update the submission.

[Naturematthe]

All right, thanks for the heads-up! I replaced all four files and hopefully didn't screw any of them up.

[Kricketune54]

I'm still not entirely sure about m33 and following as I'm afraid to trade the playability for more accuracy there.

• my recommendation for m33 until m49, would be to include the text "con pedale", meaning with pedal. This would indicate to the performer to use pedal where necessary - I'm thinking those places where the LH has a low C but in a separate layer, there is an ascending pattern that you wouldn't be able to hold the low note for.

You could then include the text "senza pedale" at m50, indicating the with pedal section is over.

Visual/Document Feedback
• In general I would reexamine the positioning of your dynamics - ideally, they can visually align between both staffs nicely (don't feel like they always have to, sometimes it's preferable to have dynamics a little to the left of where they normally would be, as opposed to widening the distance between staffs), centered under the corresponding pitch they are meant to indicate volume for. I think m1 and m50 are primary things to correct, but can give others a look over too (see m1 corrected image for example)

Spoiler

[close]

• Speaking again to visual stuff, make sure elements aren't needlessly overlapping with each other. Sometimes it's hard to avoid it with a tie and dealing with multiples layers, but for m2, the cresc. could move down a little so it's not going through the sextuplet's six.
• Sometimes with visual overlap, you will need to play with the staff distance - go to staff tool in Finale, then click the box that will appear at the bottom of the bottom staff, and drag it down a little to increase the distance. This will then allow you to fix the aforementioned overlap at m40 for example

Spoiler

[close]

• One last visual thing I'd like to mention in this post - Ottava's (8va's) typically are aligned like this:

Spoiler

[close]

. You could also move the 8va covering m89-92 down a tad so it's not so close to m88 in particular


Page 1+2 Notes
• m8 lower RH layer I would remove the notes on beat 1.75 they're a bit messy to try and restrike and then move fingers around for beat 2. I wool also remove m9 beat 1.75 the Bn under the D# for playability.
• m12 this will capture the spirit of that higher part a little better (note I widened the system distance and moved cresc. down a little also)

Spoiler

[close]

• m12 LH I don't hear a tremolo occurring, sounds like two quarter note's (same E's as m11) and then half rest for beats 3-4
• m14 there are 3 additional audible notes, you could do this or leave as you have it since they aren't the melody

Spoiler

[close]

• m16 listening closer to the LH I think beats 2.5-end of measure are not staccatoed, just 2.0 is. Same goes for m28 LH
• In general, I would recommend removing the lower of the two octaves for m21-28. It's difficult to do beats 1 and 2 but it's the move to beat 3 that's particularly difficult. I also don't hear them in most instances anyway.
• m27 RH hearing beats 3 and 4 as follows, not quite as high as you have. Also hearing beat 1 and 2 of next measure a little different (note I removed octaves in the screenshot)

Spoiler

[close]

• also in m28 RH, as far as note prominence goes, I would suggest having this figure instead: 

Spoiler

[close]

• m32 LH beat 3.0 sounds staccato


That covers first two pages of notes plus main visual stuff, let me know if you have any questions!

[Naturematthe]

• my recommendation for m33 until m49, would be to include the text "con pedale", meaning with pedal. This would indicate to the performer to use pedal where necessary - I'm thinking those places where the LH has a low C but in a separate layer, there is an ascending pattern that you wouldn't be able to hold the low note for.

You could then include the text "senza pedale" at m50, indicating the with pedal section is over.

Added those, thanks for the suggestion!

Visual/Document Feedback
• In general I would reexamine the positioning of your dynamics - ideally, they can visually align between both staffs nicely (don't feel like they always have to, sometimes it's preferable to have dynamics a little to the left of where they normally would be, as opposed to widening the distance between staffs), centered under the corresponding pitch they are meant to indicate volume for. I think m1 and m50 are primary things to correct, but can give others a look over too (see m1 corrected image for example)

Spoiler

[close]

• Speaking again to visual stuff, make sure elements aren't needlessly overlapping with each other. Sometimes it's hard to avoid it with a tie and dealing with multiples layers, but for m2, the cresc. could move down a little so it's not going through the sextuplet's six.
• Sometimes with visual overlap, you will need to play with the staff distance - go to staff tool in Finale, then click the box that will appear at the bottom of the bottom staff, and drag it down a little to increase the distance. This will then allow you to fix the aforementioned overlap at m40 for example

Spoiler

[close]

• One last visual thing I'd like to mention in this post - Ottava's (8va's) typically are aligned like this:

Spoiler

[close]

. You could also move the 8va covering m89-92 down a tad so it's not so close to m88 in particular

I redid all the dynamics etc as suggested and changed the staff distance in some parts.

Page 1+2 Notes
• m8 lower RH layer I would remove the notes on beat 1.75 they're a bit messy to try and restrike and then move fingers around for beat 2. I wool also remove m9 beat 1.75 the Bn under the D# for playability.

Done. In m9 I also removed the A on beat 1.5, looked more natural to me that way.

• m12 this will capture the spirit of that higher part a little better (note I widened the system distance and moved cresc. down a little also)

Spoiler

[close]

I redid that part based on your idea but changed it a little bit.

• m12 LH I don't hear a tremolo occurring, sounds like two quarter note's (same E's as m11) and then half rest for beats 3-4

I agree except for the half rest as I could hear an E being played in beat 3. I put two quarters plus a half note there, maybe three quarter notes plus a quarter rest would be more accurate?

• m14 there are 3 additional audible notes, you could do this or leave as you have it since they aren't the melody

Spoiler

[close]

I'm going to leave it as it is. I played it like you suggested and personally find the additional notes a little distracting.

• m16 listening closer to the LH I think beats 2.5-end of measure are not staccatoed, just 2.0 is. Same goes for m28 LH
• In general, I would recommend removing the lower of the two octaves for m21-28. It's difficult to do beats 1 and 2 but it's the move to beat 3 that's particularly difficult. I also don't hear them in most instances anyway.
• m27 RH hearing beats 3 and 4 as follows, not quite as high as you have. Also hearing beat 1 and 2 of next measure a little different (note I removed octaves in the screenshot)

Spoiler

[close]

• also in m28 RH, as far as note prominence goes, I would suggest having this figure instead: 

Spoiler

[close]

• m32 LH beat 3.0 sounds staccato

Agreeing with those, changed them.

Files have been updated. Thank you for your suggestions again!

[Kricketune54]

Apologies for the delayed feedback on my end.

I agree except for the half rest as I could hear an E being played in beat 3. I put two quarters plus a half note there, maybe three quarter notes plus a quarter rest would be more accurate?

Ah, okay, hearing as you're describing. Quarter note beat 3, and beat 4 as a quarter rest.

Other comments, I'm good with your decisions, though there are couple things I think you forgot:
• I think you might've forgotten the ottava feedback I left you earlier. m87-92 the ottava could also go a little higher so it's not so close to the top of m88.
• I'm also not seeing that bit about the pedal marks for page 3, though your responses lead me to believe you intended to add con pedale?

• for pg 3, when rests in one layer are hidden, the notes in the layer above for example should have their stems pointed as if there was no additional layer below. What this looks like in practice is for m35 and m39, beat 1 and 2 RH should have their note stems flipped in the opposite direction down.
• General question for m40-48 LH, are these notes more arranged than notes you are hearing? Some of these pitches I hear but others I do not, so just thought I'd ask if that was intentional. I tend to skew towards accuracy of the original track, open to your thoughts if you disagree/have different ideas!

• RH m53, m66 for the 2nd layer (lower layer), the 8th rests in these measures could go a little higher, so that they're within the staff and closer in height to the other notes in the layer.
• m42 RH top layer for beat 4.0 and 4.5, hearing An's under both notes.
• m44 RH I'm not hearing the second layer here. For the current top layer beat 1.5 current En actually hearing a Dn. For beat's 4.0-4.5 hearing Gn's instead of current bottom notes.
• m59 key changes typically have a double bar line preceding the accidentals, so the line between m58 and m59 should be a double bar like seen at between m72-73
• What are you envisioning at m87 with the ad lib text?

[Naturematthe]

• I think you might've forgotten the ottava feedback I left you earlier. m87-92 the ottava could also go a little higher so it's not so close to the top of m88.
• I'm also not seeing that bit about the pedal marks for page 3, though your responses lead me to believe you intended to add con pedale?

Indeed, I forgot those. Should be fixed now.

• for pg 3, when rests in one layer are hidden, the notes in the layer above for example should have their stems pointed as if there was no additional layer below. What this looks like in practice is for m35 and m39, beat 1 and 2 RH should have their note stems flipped in the opposite direction down.

Did that, but now the slurs all point downwards there, which looks kinda awkward. Is there a way to fix those easily? Otherwise I'll try and "patch" that with hand-placed ones.

• General question for m40-48 LH, are these notes more arranged than notes you are hearing? Some of these pitches I hear but others I do not, so just thought I'd ask if that was intentional. I tend to skew towards accuracy of the original track, open to your thoughts if you disagree/have different ideas!

I definitely didn't focus on accuracy here, I found the harp arpeggios pretty awkward to transcribe for one hand alone. I rewrote the left hand to more accurately reflect the bass line there, I think that should be closer to the original. I generally prefer playability over accuracy when in doubt.

• RH m53, m66 for the 2nd layer (lower layer), the 8th rests in these measures could go a little higher, so that they're within the staff and closer in height to the other notes in the layer.
• m42 RH top layer for beat 4.0 and 4.5, hearing An's under both notes.

Agreed, changed those.

• m44 RH I'm not hearing the second layer here. For the current top layer beat 1.5 current En actually hearing a Dn. For beat's 4.0-4.5 hearing Gn's instead of current bottom notes.

I actually do hear the En there, although it is quite difficult to make out for sure. Beats 4.0 and 4.5 changed and second lyer removed according to your suggestion, agrreing with those.

• m59 key changes typically have a double bar line preceding the accidentals, so the line between m58 and m59 should be a double bar like seen at between m72-73

Oops, fixed it.

• What are you envisioning at m87 with the ad lib text?

In the original the part is played as 8va, but I think it on the piano it sounds better as written. I put in the "ad lib." as a compromise between accuracy and arrangement.

Will upload the fixed files after I fixed m35 and m39.

[Kricketune54]

Hey Naturematthe just wanted to check, were you waiting for a response from me before you updated your files?

[Naturematthe]

Yes, I did. Sorry for the delayed reaction, somehow I didn't get a notification for your post here.

[Kricketune54]

No worries, I apologize for not asking sooner.

Did that, but now the slurs all point downwards there, which looks kinda awkward. Is there a way to fix those easily? Otherwise I'll try and "patch" that with hand-placed ones.

By slurs, do you mean ties? This can be fixed by going to tools -> advanced tools -> special tools -> ties. Please see the attached screenshot of what that looks like to change it!

I definitely didn't focus on accuracy here, I found the harp arpeggios pretty awkward to transcribe for one hand alone. I rewrote the left hand to more accurately reflect the bass line there, I think that should be closer to the original. I generally prefer playability over accuracy when in doubt.

Reviewed this a bit more and I like this as is. Some liberties taken and you make a good point about one hand arpeggios, one thing I was thinking you could add though is in m49 for the LH you could make that a tremolo with a cresc. underneath it (either text or symbol). 

I do have some additional dynamic thoughts, subito piano seems awfully quiet for m33, as far as depicting the volume change from the previous measure. Maybe piano or even mezzo piano would be better?

Then, at m50 fortissimo might be a little better as a forte as I don't think it's that loud of a part.

I actually do hear the En there, although it is quite difficult to make out for sure. Beats 4.0 and 4.5 changed and second layer removed according to your suggestion, agreeing with those.

I do think this is an En still

In the original the part is played as 8va, but I think it on the piano it sounds better as written. I put in the "ad lib." as a compromise between accuracy and arrangement.

I'm a little confused, isn't the 8va here? so is the implication that "ad lib" is to play down an octave from what is written? In any effect, I don't think it's clear from this text what it is supposed to do.

One thing I noticed doing my check, for the last measure (92), beat 1 of the RH is a separate pitch and not tied, and should not be under the 8va.


lmk your thoughts on my comments, but when you update files next, I'll continue checking this arrangement!

[Naturematthe]

By slurs, do you mean ties? This can be fixed by going to tools -> advanced tools -> special tools -> ties. Please see the attached screenshot of what that looks like to change it!

Thank you very much! Fixed the ties (guess I looked up the wrong word for it in the dictionary) according to your suggestion.

one thing I was thinking you could add though is in m49 for the LH you could make that a tremolo with a cresc. underneath it (either text or symbol). 

I do have some additional dynamic thoughts, subito piano seems awfully quiet for m33, as far as depicting the volume change from the previous measure. Maybe piano or even mezzo piano would be better?

Then, at m50 fortissimo might be a little better as a forte as I don't think it's that loud of a part.

Agreeing with those, changed them. Really like the tremolo idea for m49.

I'm a little confused, isn't the 8va here? so is the implication that "ad lib" is to play down an octave from what is written? In any effect, I don't think it's clear from this text what it is supposed to do.

I tried explaining the ad lib in a footnote in the score, but it didn't really work that great. Decided to scrap the ad lib altogether as it is closer to the original when played in 8va. (In short: 8va is more accurate, playing it without the 8va sounds better in my opinion.)

One thing I noticed doing my check, for the last measure (92), beat 1 of the RH is a separate pitch and not tied, and should not be under the 8va.

Agreeing with that one too.

Files will be updated within the next few minutes have been updated.