Responses in red
Quote from: XiaoMigros on July 18, 2023, 04:12:02 AMThank you for the nit-picks! All appreciated and helpful. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again!
- I think the w in 'World' should be capitalised
Noted, and currently in consideration. It's listed as a lowercase both on the official soundtrack and in-game music player.- m1-16: You could exchange the LH of player 1 with the RH of player 2, then you can write the current P1LH part in its original register
Noted, and currently in consideration. My 2 main concerns with this are potential overcrowding in the treble register with both pianos, and a couple awkward hand/finger crossings for P1.- I think the 32nd notes at the end of m8 would be better as grace notes
Agreed; fixed.- m1-4 & 9-12: I think beat 3 & 3.5 in the LH of P2 both sound like regular eighth notes
Agreed & fixed; not sure what I was thinking at the time...- For m5-8 and 13-16, I also think these are better as eighth notes; eighth+rest is not the same thing as staccato quarter
Yeah, that does make a bit more of an impact now that I've tried reading it both ways. Fixed.- Do you want to write the whole P2LH part under an 8vb marking (except for the end)? Especially for m1-16, where all the notes are below the staff
Yes; Not sure why I didn't. Fixed.- Since m1-6 and m9-14 are identical, you could use a repeat instead of writing them out twice?
I'm more than happy to send you the product with this change implemented, but I personally believe it disrupts the more natural flow of how systems lined up with how the sections were divided (if that makes sense).- On page 3, you could move all the slurs of the harp part between the staves, like you do for the first one
Done; I kept "sim." on the bottom system for P1 due to my dynamic marking in m24. I also have P1LH stems pointed in the same direction as the top system for additional visual similarity. I am more than willing to get rid of the "sim." and just add the slurs if you think that would be better for clarity sake.- Also, I feel like you could be more creative with the dynamics here, especially on the second system: There's no need to have P1 match P2 and get louder towards the second measure.
I think all the messa di voce I've been taught and done as a vocalist took over for that page. And looking at it now, P1 & P2 having parallel dynamic movement wasn't my finest musical decision. I've changed the dynamics a bit, but I still want it in that tranquil, soft, legato feel (exception of m22 P1RH with that "climatic" Cnat).- For this page in particular, make sure that the cresc/decresc markings don't collide with beams or dynamics, and, where there's space, dynamics and hairpins should be on the same height.
I'm going to be honest here, I don't know how I missed all the collisions in P1 at the bottom system. That's nowhere near even a "subtle" collision. Should be fixed.- m25+: I'm hearing P2RH as triads, there's an extra layer of harmony playing an octave below your current part.
Fixed. That was a user error; I did a transcription on Musescore for my speedy convenience and then pulled up Finale to write the piano arrangement based on my transcription. I clearly ignored the viola/violin III part in there. Oops.- For P2LH, the same point as earlier concerning note durations: These all sound like regular eighths to me
Agreed; fixed.- m25: If you want, you could write P1RH under an 8va line, to show that it matches the LH
Done.- m33+: I feel like the flute melody loses focus too suddenly here; in the previous section it played in octaves, but now it doesn't plus it's an octave lower than the original. Do you think there's a way to let it stand out better?
I think I have a decent solution. M33-35 P1 now has the harp in the LH while doubling the flute at original pitch in the RH, before it [probably] realistically plays those harp arpeggios and continues as I initally wrote it. So, m37-39 P2RH has the flute part in octaves (at original pitch & octave below). m39 I threw the E4 (originally P2RH) to P1LH. Thoughts?- I don't think the senza pedale marking is needed in the beginning of the sheet and in front of the ending; it seems pretty clear from context how it is to be played.
While I don't disagree at all, I also believe having it clearly stated won't hurt either. As a few of my professors have told me, having more specific markings in music are more common place and preferred by some.- For the rest of the con/senza pedale markings, it would be great if they could start just in front of the note, moved left slightly
Done.- Thanks for labeling the ending! As of recently, we'd like them to be labeled as 'Optional Ending' (size 14, bold)
No problem! And label has been edited accordingly.- For some reason your noteheads are loaded from the EngraverFontSet and not Maestro, could you change that?
I think I fixed it?- I'm able to fit 3 systems onto each page from page 2 onwards, reducing the total number to 4.
If you want to send me what that looks like with these changes, I'd be willing to consider it. Maybe I'm being too picky, but I like having the sections on each separate page. I'm also horrible with dealing with systems on Finale, as it takes me maybe 45 minutes on a good day. I can get by, but some of the work I had to do before my initial upload of this was a nightmare from what I remember.- Could you go over the dynamics again and make sure they're all centered between the staves?
Heh heh heh...*cries* So, uh, with the changes I made for m33-36 messed with the dynamics for P1. Otherwise, I typically try to center any dynamic markings between staves as best as I can with the spacing I have.
Additionally, the ones in your ending are a little too close to the repeat barline.
Agreed; fixed.