[NDS] Pokémon Black Version & Pokémon White Version - "Pokémon Center" by goldenscruff

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Pokémon
Game: Pokémon Black Version & Pokémon White Version
Console: Nintendo DS
Title: Pokémon Center
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: goldenscruff

[goldenscruff]

[goldenscruff]

The correct pedal direction should be, "No pedal except where marked". Should I change it to this?

The pedal in m13 is only there to hold the bottom F in RH, and shouldn't be played if not playing the bottom F. Should there be a performance note for this?

I sort of have the guitar fill at the end of m13 notated in musescore, but I thought the accuracy is not worth its playability. Image

[Kricketune54]

Hi and welcome to NinSheetMusic's submissions! I understand you have been around discord a bit recently, it's great to see a new (albeit familiar XD) Gen 5 submission!

The way the submissions process works is two updaters will review your sheet and highlight notes and formatting on your sheet that need to be updated, which you can then review and implement. Once two updaters approve of your sheet, it will be accepted and put on the site in the next update!

• nitpicky, but for the title an ampersand (&) is utilized in the official title (see other sheet examples onsite)
• m1 although there are pedal marks, it's generally not necessary to add senza pedal before any pedal markings appear. I think that generally answers your question. As far as adding pedal markings to your arrangement, we can work on getting those added, we usually recommend using the ped. and * symbols for applying and lifting up the pedals.
• For dynamics, the general advisory we give is to center them under the notehead they are applicable to.

Spoiler

[close]

• m2, m4 and m6 RH given this song is in 4/4 time, the note beaming should work out such that 2 beats are on one half of the measure, and 2 on the other. currently, beat 2.75 is incorrectly merged with beat 3.0 for that dotted 8th note, here's a screenshot of what the beaming should/could look like. For a general guidance on note beaming and grouping, please see this site! https://www.musicnotes.com/blog/note-beaming-and-grouping-in-music-theory/

Spoiler

[close]

• m9 as opposed to the note about omitting bottom notes, you could use parentheses, or shrink the notehead's size. These both are used commonly to convey notes that are optional. Would note I haven't really looked at this measure too much (will have some comments about the layers and note stem directions) but this is a general feedback piece I thought would help.


Notes
• m3 and m7 RH 2.5 hearing En not Cn underneath the An
• m10 LH 3.0 and 3.5 sound staccato

I sort of have the guitar fill at the end of m13 notated in musescore, but I thought the accuracy is not worth its playability. Image

For this part (which is m12), I'm leaning towards going with what you have currently in some form. It's not really possible to sustain that Fn on top and go down to that An for the guitar notes as you have

Going to have a few more comments as well related to notes, note layers, and the general slur appearances, but wanted to give you some quick feedback! Let me know if you have any questions

[goldenscruff]

• nitpicky, but for the title an ampersand (&) is utilized in the official title (see other sheet examples onsite)

Fixed

As far as adding pedal markings to your arrangement, we can work on getting those added, we usually recommend using the ped. and * symbols for applying and lifting up the pedals.

I've gone and tried adding some in Finale Notepad, not sure if they're done to spec.

• For dynamics, the general advisory we give is to center them under the notehead they are applicable to.

I've copied musescore's spacing now.

beat 2.75 is incorrectly merged with beat 3.0 for that dotted 8th note

I know that we avoid writing durations across beats and the middle of the bar, but I liked the symmetry of the two notes being the same staccato. I've changed it to how you've suggested, as 3 offbeat semiquavers has a similar issue, of not knowing where the center of the bar is.

• m9 as opposed to the note about omitting bottom notes, you could use parentheses, or shrink the notehead's size.

Both small heads and parentheses don't look great on the seconds, but I've changed them to small heads, partly so I don't have to manually place parentheses in Notepad.

• m3 and m7 RH 2.5 hearing En not Cn underneath the An • m10 LH 3.0 and 3.5 sound staccato

I had En in an earlier version. Changed both of these.

I've also removed the repeat barline at the start of the piece.

I've updated the file, but I knowingly haven't fixed the staccatos and slurs (I'm not particularly attached to the slurs happy to remove) because I'll probably have to import from xml again.

[Kricketune54]

I've gone and tried adding some in Finale Notepad, not sure if they're done to spec.

Looks like they've sort of come through. There's a weird dash line that got added that we can remove at the end. I do want to suggest removing the pedals. Usually we don't recommend pairing pedal directions with staccatoed notes as it's not quite possible to do the staccato effect when holding down the pedal. I also don't think the sections that are staccatoed really merit the lengthening effect regardless. Even with the cur

I know that we avoid writing durations across beats and the middle of the bar, but I liked the symmetry of the two notes being the same staccato. I've changed it to how you've suggested, as 3 offbeat semiquavers has a similar issue, of not knowing where the center of the bar is.

Yeah ultimately will look a bit cleaner as well. One thing that seems to be missing from my screenshot is beat 2.75 can also beam across the rest to beat 2.25 for example. This applies for m2, 4, and 6.

Both small heads and parentheses don't look great on the seconds, but I've changed them to small heads, partly so I don't have to manually place parentheses in Notepad. I had En in an earlier version. Changed both of these.

So these noteheads are a bit small - generally I think 75-85% notehead size (not sure if that's how it's displayed in MuseScore) is the size you'll typically see. In the casee of this sheet, I don't think the notehead size changes are necessary, usually that is only done with secondary parts and not octaves (example here: https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/5379).

I've updated the file, but I knowingly haven't fixed the staccatos and slurs (I'm not particularly attached to the slurs happy to remove) because I'll probably have to import from xml again.

Yeah some of this stuff can't be fixed in NotePad unfortunately.


More Feedback

• Link at bottom of page for NinSheetMusic should be htpps not http
• m8 RH move the gliss symbol's starting point a bit to the right so it doesn't obscure the dot of the dotted quarter note. I'm also hearing this as an Fn, not an An.
• m10 RH first layer I'm not hearing the current small note heads on beats 1.0-2.0 - as far as the Dn's that are currently the middle pitches, I hear beat 2.0 the Dn go to an Fn.
• m12 RH beat 1 second layer the Fn on bottom is not going to be playable. If you want to represent the note in some way still, you could move it up to An
• m14 RH First layer, I'm also not hearing small notes, though for the Dn's for 1.0-2.0, hearing 1.5 as an Fn. You can also remove the fingering directions (the 1's).
• m16 RH I think I hear the Cn's that are being represented on 1.0-2.0 - It will be a bit difficult to play though, so I would suggest removing them on beat 1.5 and 2.5.
• m16 LH 3.0-4.0 I think you could remove staccatos as they sound a little long, and could add a slur as well.

[Latios212]

Both small heads and parentheses don't look great on the seconds, but I've changed them to small heads, partly so I don't have to manually place parentheses in Notepad.

So these noteheads are a bit small - generally I think 75-85% notehead size (not sure if that's how it's displayed in MuseScore) is the size you'll typically see. In the casee of this sheet, I don't think the notehead size changes are necessary, usually that is only done with secondary parts and not octaves (example here: https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/5379).

Yeah, my suggestion here would actually be to avoid the cluttery look that either the parentheses or small noteheads bring. How about a textual performance note saying to omit the lower notes in the octaves if the performer finds them difficult?

[goldenscruff]

One thing that seems to be missing from my screenshot is beat 2.75 can also beam across the rest to beat 2.25 for example.

Now that you've reminded me of notepad's features, I've changed 3.25 to a semiquaver, as I can get the symmetry without losing the middle of the bar.

Usually we don't recommend pairing pedal directions with staccatoed notes as it's not quite possible to do the staccato effect when holding down the pedal.

The pedal was only for the gliss and the 10th interval, not the lengthened staccato effect. I've removed the pedal and will just leave it up to performer's discretion if they want the playability over staccatoness.

Link at bottom of page for NinSheetMusic should be htpps not http

changed to https (which I think you meant to write).

m8 RH move the gliss symbol's starting point a bit to the right so it doesn't obscure the dot of the dotted quarter note. I'm also hearing this as an Fn, not an An.

Moved the gliss, and I can hear the Fn start on suggestion.

I hear m10 beat 2.0 the Dn go to an Fn.

I can hear it too, fixed.

m10 RH first layer I'm not hearing the current small note heads on beats 1.0-2.0

m14 RH First layer, I'm also not hearing small notes, though for the Dn's for 1.0-2.0, hearing 1.5 as an Fn.

On listening again, I'm not sure of m9 Cn in RH either, I think one of the strings is playing the offbeat Eb and the other is playing F Eb on 3.0 4.0. Since the offbeat semiquavers are more prevalent to me, I will choose to notate them.
I can only hear one string line m10 b1.0-2.75

With m14, same as m9 I don't hear the Cn in m13.
Since its probably not a coincidence, I've removed the octaves in m9,m10,m13,m14.

m9 The bottom An is the final note for the gliss in the original. Now that I've removed the octaves, the bottom An feels out of place (its not part of a line, and finishing the gliss on the bottom A is horrible for playability) so I have removed it.

I'm not certain on stemming rules, but I think the Cn in m13 and maybe DFD in m14 will need its stem flipped.

m16 RH I think I hear the Cn's that are being represented on 1.0-2.0 - It will be a bit difficult to play though, so I would suggest removing them on beat 1.5 and 2.5.

The Bb C Bb chord is hard to play, though I have opted to omit the bottom Bb of b1.5, so that if the performer omits the bottom line, the counter melody isn't gutted.

m16 LH 3.0-4.0 I think you could remove staccatos as they sound a little long, and could add a slur as well.

I don't think the bass sounds much longer than at m4 or m8 to warrant non staccato. It might just be resonance with strings clouding the bass sound. Maybe the performer's favorite, slurred staccatos are appropriate.

How about a textual performance note saying to omit the lower notes in the octaves if the performer finds them difficult?

m9 as opposed to the note about omitting bottom notes, you could use parentheses, or shrink the notehead's size.

m12 RH beat 1 second layer the Fn on bottom is not going to be playable. If you want to represent the note in some way still, you could move it up to An

I don't like the idea of bringing the Fn up to an An, as that breaks the Dm chord, and the G, E, enclosure preceding it.

For certain pianists, the bottom Fn is playable, especially with a bit of rolling and pedal. I expect <10% of Ninsheetmusic's target audience to be comfortable playing a 10th, which is why the notes are in small heads, and I had text originally indicating to omit the bottom line at performer's discretion.

Now that I've removed quite a few octaves from the bottom line, it has more 'secondary part' feel than before, so I will keep the small note heads.

Spoiler

So these noteheads are a bit small - generally I think 75-85% notehead size

Music XML doesn't specify a size other than 'cue' 'full' 'large' or 'grace-cue', so I either need to change a Notepad setting/style, or get someone with full Finale to adjust the notehead sizes. Maybe should add this point to Musescore -> Notepad limitations.
https://www.w3.org/2021/06/musicxml40/musicxml-reference/elements/type/

[close]

I would like to keep the bottom line is, as it currently is (optional bottom line for big handed pianists). Its probably okay to change m11 b3 to a half note, and put m12 b1 up the octave, as a compromise instead of removing the bottom line entirely.

[Kricketune54]

Now that you've reminded me of notepad's features, I've changed 3.25 to a semiquaver, as I can get the symmetry without losing the middle of the bar.

Additional beaming can be added to the left hand for 1-8 as well (sorry didn't notice this first time)

The pedal was only for the gliss and the 10th interval, not the lengthened staccato effect. I've removed the pedal and will just leave it up to performer's discretion if they want the playability over staccatoness.

That's a good point regarding pedaling and gliss - definitely do this myself often.

changed to https (which I think you meant to write).

(oops thanks for getting that right yourself lol)

On listening again, I'm not sure of m9 Cn in RH either, I think one of the strings is playing the offbeat Eb and the other is playing F Eb on 3.0 4.0. Since the offbeat semiquavers are more prevalent to me, I will choose to notate them.

I think for m9 RH it would be a little more consistent to have the second layer be a dotted half note Fn for beat 1-3 and Eb quarter note on beat 4. Although the guitar part is a bit more prominent, I think it's weird to have it just in this one spot.

I can only hear one string line m10 b1.0-2.75
With m14, same as m9 I don't hear the Cn in m13.

I can hear this as you have now.

m9 The bottom An is the final note for the gliss in the original. Now that I've removed the octaves, the bottom An feels out of place (its not part of a line, and finishing the gliss on the bottom A is horrible for playability) so I have removed it.

Good change.

I'm not certain on stemming rules, but I think the Cn in m13 and maybe DFD in m14 will need its stem flipped.
The Bb C Bb chord is hard to play, though I have opted to omit the bottom Bb of b1.5, so that if the performer omits the bottom line, the counter melody isn't gutted.

Yeah for this, could split the A's on beat 1 of m13 RH into the first layer, and have the Dn in the second layer. Can update this when I update your files in Finale if that works (after sheet approval).

I don't think the bass sounds much longer than at m4 or m8 to warrant non staccato. It might just be resonance with strings clouding the bass sound. Maybe the performer's favorite, slurred staccatos are appropriate.

Relistening I have to agree with you!

I don't like the idea of bringing the Fn up to an An, as that breaks the Dm chord, and the G, E, enclosure preceding it.

For certain pianists, the bottom Fn is playable, especially with a bit of rolling and pedal. I expect <10% of Ninsheetmusic's target audience to be comfortable playing a 10th, which is why the notes are in small heads, and I had text originally indicating to omit the bottom line at performer's discretion.


I would like to keep the bottom line is, as it currently is (optional bottom line for big handed pianists). Its probably okay to change m11 b3 to a half note, and put m12 b1 up the octave, as a compromise instead of removing the bottom line entirely.

I disagree that changing to an A breaks up the Dm chord, even with one pitch removed in the RH, the overall progression of notes feels and sounds like Dm. As far as playability, it is low, but I am open to you leaving it for the next updater.

Now that I've removed quite a few octaves from the bottom line, it has more 'secondary part' feel than before, so I will keep the small note heads.

My last thought on the notehead size/performance note bit. Having looked at this arrangement a few times now, I don't think the small noteheads are necessary, nore warranting a performance note. I think most times you see performance notes or small noteheads, it's for difficult parts that are somewhat secondary. Posting a few examples of small noteheads. Keep them if you want, but I think this song is not that complicated and it's not necessary. Can also make updates to this notehead size upon approval for you.

https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/3193
https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/5379


For ease of reading, going to leave my last feedback bits together down here.
• Add beaming to LH notes for m1-8 (beat 1.0 to 2.5, and 3.0 to 4.0)
• I'm hearing m13 LH beat 2 as a Fn
• My comment about m9 layer 2
• For dynamics - general advisory is to format them so that they are centered between the staffs and centered under and above the noteheads they first impact (screenshot)

[goldenscruff]

For dynamics [...]

Someone forgot to add a line to their conversion_list.txt

Additional beaming can be added to the left hand for 1-8

Added

I think for m9 RH it would be a little more consistent to have the second layer be a dotted half note Fn for beat 1-3 and Eb quarter note on beat 4. Although the guitar part is a bit more prominent, I think it's weird to have it just in this one spot.

I do agree it is weird to notate the syncopated rhythms just here, (I still think I hear strings playing syncopation as well), so I've taken your suggestion, but I don't see any reason to not notate the hit on b2.

I'm not certain on stemming rules, but I think the Cn in m13 and maybe DFD in m14 will need its stem flipped.

Yeah for this, could split the A's on beat 1 of m13 RH into the first layer, and have the Dn in the second layer.

I'm not sure if I was understood here. I'm not sure which of the two stemming options I should follow:
A: B:
I've changed all stemming to option A, as that is a good guess for correct engraving.

I disagree that changing to an A breaks up the Dm chord, even with one pitch removed in the RH, the overall progression of notes feels and sounds like Dm. As far as playability, it is low, but I am open to you leaving it for the next updater

I don't know if it is the baroque ear in me, but I really don't like the ADA 'chord', even if I remove the En in m11, (to remove the broken enclosure). I've written a different fully playable alternative, that I added in my last post in an edit, so you may not have seen it.

Having looked at this arrangement a few times now, I don't think the small noteheads are necessary, nore warranting a performance note.

When the line's not physically impossible for some pianists, there isn't a reason to have small note clutter. I've changed them to normal notes, and the only thing the sheet would gain with smaller notes now is the connection to the Fn m12 b1 in the RH, a.k.a. nothing.

I'm hearing m13 LH beat 2 as a Fn

Good catch.

[Kricketune54]

Yeah for this, could split the A's on beat 1 of m13 RH into the first layer, and have the Dn in the second layer.
I'm not sure if I was understood here. I'm not sure which of the two stemming options I should follow:
A: B:
I've changed all stemming to option A, as that is a good guess for correct engraving.

Ah, so for here, I meant to have m13's layers for beat 1-2 be similar to m15. Please see attached screenshot, note I've also flipped the slur direction (not sure if this is a NotePad possible change).

I don't know if it is the baroque ear in me, but I really don't like the ADA 'chord', even if I remove the En in m11, (to remove the broken enclosure). I've written a different fully playable alternative, that I added in my last post in an edit, so you may not have seen it.

Oh your alternative was fine, sorry I did see and didn't address it (instead was addressing the how it was on the sheet at the time).

When the line's not physically impossible for some pianists, there isn't a reason to have small note clutter. I've changed them to normal notes, and the only thing the sheet would gain with smaller notes now is the connection to the Fn m12 b1 in the RH, a.k.a. nothing.

Generally I think our approach as updaters skews towards accommodating a wide range of hand sizes but also stressing musical representation. My hands are a bit on the bigger side, and the former fingering was not possible on a normal keyboard size (could do Fn and An but the Dn in between made it impossible to cover all three notes). Personally I think sheet looks cleaner now also without the smaller noteheads

In lieu of latest files have a couple things wanted to also mention, but if you can't address them in NotePad I can after approval.

• m9 RH second layer, you could turn the tied notes on beat 2 and 3 into a half note, half notes are generally accepted as written across the middle of a measure unlike the beaming I mentioned earlier on this sheet.
• m12 RH second layer, the beat 4 should also be flipped with the stem facing opposite to its current direction. Stem directions should be inverse in count to the same number of beats in the layer above or below it it (ex. 2 beats worth of notes in one layer, the stems for 2 beats should be facing the opposite direction). Attaching screenshot for this as well (also think it would be good to flip slur here as well).

[goldenscruff]

Generally I think our approach as updaters skews towards accommodating a wide range of hand sizes but also stressing musical representation.

I'll keep this in mind for future sheets.

m9 RH second layer, you could turn the tied notes on beat 2 and 3 into a half note, half notes are generally accepted as written across the middle of a measure unlike the beaming I mentioned earlier on this sheet.

I just went with what I knew wouldn't be incorrect, but not necessarily the best.

m12 RH second layer, the beat 4 should also be flipped with the stem facing opposite to its current direction. Stem directions should be inverse in count to the same number of beats in the layer above or below it

Changed.

(also think it would be good to flip slur here as well).

Flipping the slur gets around having to dip down from above voice 1 into a low voice 2 note. m11-12 Also had this problem so I flipped the slur there as well.
Notepad gives full control over the bezier curve, so it is possible.

Please see attached screenshot,

I'm not opposed to the stem direction changes here. I just don't like the voices and stems lining up perfectly, there should be a little horizontal offset ie; so it is clear which stem the bottom note belongs to.
I don't believe notepad has this option, so this is a post approval finale job.
The last bar in this image is an example of the horizontal offset:

[Kricketune54]

I'll keep this in mind for future sheets.

Okay  always feel free to ask any questions about this on Discord or here in that case!

I just went with what I knew wouldn't be incorrect, but not necessarily the best.

In 4/4 time, it is more correct and more common to see held notes on beat 2 and 3 combined into a half note as opposed to just tying them, so that would be the case for this here. I guess it's not too common that this question comes up here, but we do generally expect this to be written as a half note.

Flipping the slur gets around having to dip down from above voice 1 into a low voice 2 note. m11-12 Also had this problem so I flipped the slur there as well. Notepad gives full control over the bezier curve, so it is possible.

Looks good!

I'm not opposed to the stem direction changes here. I just don't like the voices and stems lining up perfectly, there should be a little horizontal offset ie; so it is clear which stem the bottom note belongs to.
I don't believe notepad has this option, so this is a post approval finale job.
The last bar in this image is an example of the horizontal offset:

I don't think the examples you have provided correlate well to m13 and m15, there are no accidentals to work around, and it's overall clear which notes are a part of which layer. Generally, you don't want to offset notes at all because it makes reading different rhythm patterns between layers confusing (even if this particular example is quite simple), and aesthetically it looks much cleaner to just have the half note snug between the octaves. I did try a few things, but ended up settling with the files I uploaded. If you really do believe I got it incorrect, please share a screenshot if you can for what you think it should look like (maybe achieved in MuseScore)

Marking as approved, I have made changes to the staccato placement for second layer notes, the tempo marking fonts, and also updated the directions of the notes for m13 and m15 RH.

[goldenscruff]

The pdf looks fine, but the staccatos have moved to bad places in the .mus file in notepad. Reuploaded a fixed .mus

[Bloop]

About slur placements: I don't usually see slurs going over rests in piano music. Usually slurs mean playing passages legato, as well as them being used as phrasing marks. Maybe for the vibraphone parts you could put the first four and second four notes in two separate slurs, and just leave the slur out for the staccato countermelodies:
You cannot view this attachment.

In m9-16, slurs seem to switch voices between their starting and ending points (for example, m9 starts on the upper melody voice, but ends in m10 on the lower harmony voice). I think it'd make more sense to notate the slurs over only the melody voice, and if you specifically wanna note that the last two notes in the harmony voice should be legato, you could add a second slur to them? Like this:
You cannot view this attachment.

About the horizontal offset in m13 and 15, I actually do usually move the up-stemmed notes a bit to the right so they don't clash with each other. In this example it's not too crazy, but moving just a few ticks to the right doesn't impact readability that much, so I don't mind making that edit for you if you want ^^

A few other tiny things:
-m10 and 14: When there's no second layer above or below the notes (like in beats 1-2.5 here), staccatos should go on the notehead side of the notes.
-m12: I hear a low F on beat 4 in the bass