Messages

I believe in the RH of m1-16, all the notes are tonic chords. I also think they would sound better an octave up, as that top note is what my mind immediately focused on.
In m21/23 b1, I think there are two notes played at the same time, similar to m17/19

I moved the notes an octave up and added the thirds in m21 and m23; however, it doesn't seem to me like there are only tonic chords in m1-16...

As with my suggestions on Phosphor, I think it would be good to move the percussion along with the other hand as well just to avoid clashing. Sure, the actual notes of the percussion in the song don't change, but percussion clashes less as percussion than it does as piano, so I think that would be nice.

I shifted the bass just like in Phosphor.

Thank you for the feedback!

m3 RH - I hear b1 an F below the E, b1.5 an A above the F, b2 a D above the B, b3 a B below the G, and b4 a C below the A
m4 RH - b1, 1.5, 2 same as m3
See also m11-12, m19-20,
m15-16 and m23-24 sound similar but have a little bit different, especially on b2.5 where there is an A (and maybe still an E, though that might not exist there)
m27 RH - b1-3 I hear a run going C-E-F#-G-F#
m28 RH - b2 there is a D up top
m32 RH - b1-2.5 I hear a run going B-E-G-E (Em tonic position starting at the B you have) and maybe not a D on b2
m36 and m40/41 parallel m28 and m32

I looked through these suggestions and made most of the changes; are you sure the notes in m32 are B-E-G-E and not C-E-G-E? I think I hear a C...

It also could be beneficial to mess around with the voicings. For some of the measures (especially the ones like I've mentioned here), it seems like there may be a melody and a harmony, so it may or may not be good to split them into different voices.

I tried to modify the voices to better distinguish between melody and harmony.

For the left hand, it's not a bad idea to have it make up for the lack of percussion. Right now, though, the notes you have playing clash quite a bit with what's going on in the melody. It might help to have the chord you're playing in that hand shift along with the main chords that are going on in the right hand (so perhaps one measure you're playing an A and an E, and the next it's an F and a C, for example). I'd say mess around with that and see what you can do with it!

Ok, that makes sense, I modified the bass in these parts.

Thank you for the suggestions!

This track plays during Niko's first interaction with Prophetbot, and it is almost the same as Phosphor, but starting immediately with percussion and with the front instruments removed: in the soundtrack, the two are separated, and I decided to write them in different arrangements aswell because the exclusion of the instruments makes a simpler way of performing possible (in Phosphor, I had to remove some notes to make it possible to play others, especially in the percussion parts).

This track plays when Niko first enters the Barrens.

Apologies! Upon looking close again, I found a few things that needed some modifying and went ahead to change them. I removed some instances of the higher voice being present when it isn't in the track, abolished some unplayable notes in the lower voice and parenthesized some that were present in both staves and changed some dynamics. I hope that doesn't trouble anyone who might have already been looking through the sheet.

-While writing this in 6/8 isn't necessarily wrong, you could also write it in 3/4 with all note values doubled (so the l.h. in the first measure would be quarter, quarter, triplet 8ths). If you feel strongly about feeling it in one beat, you could even keep the tempo marking as dotted half note = 38. Whatever you prefer though! I'll use the original measure numbers for now.

Unless there is a specific reason to write this arrangement in 3/4, I find 6/8 to work well and the notation to be clear either way; as to why I decided to go for the latter, it seems to me that a slower ternary tempo is more adapt for the track, compared to a rapid binary one, but I'm open to other considerations.

-Usually legato slurs don't end and start on the same note, like they do in m5 and other places. It'd be best to either move the end of the slur one note back, or the start of the slur one note forward, or even alternatively, leave out the slurs all together and write "legato" or "legatissimo" at the start of the melody.

That makes sense! I thought of that too, but decided to phrase the melody that way because I had seen it done in many books of classical arrangements (though, some stuff was notated quite strangely on those too). I ultimately decided to push the start of said slurs one note forward, because placing a legato or legatissimo expression mark might weirdly contrast with the periodic lower staccato.

-m10-11, as well as m12 beat 6: All these notes should have their stem direction flipped.
-m11: I don't think you necessarily need the parentheses around the low E in the R.H., as the R.H. can easily take that note.
-m13: Personally I think the melody loses a bit of power when leaving out the bottom octave here. You could still add it, with these little changes:
    -m15: The dotted quarter note G would have to be removed, because moving it down an octave brings it in the same octave as the L.H.
    -m16: There will be an overlap between the melody and the dotted quarter notes E and F#. These dotted quarter notes could be changed to A and B. I hear these notes softly in the strings in the background too ^^

Yes, updated!

Thanks for the feedback.

[Clocktowers Beneath the Sea]

Clocktowers Beneath the Sea
A Hat in Time [PC]

[Files]

Hello again! For this year's update, I decided to arrange this wonderful track from A Hat in Time. The process was rather complex, mostly due to the many voices that I found myself juggling with, all within a limited high range, but I managed to come up with something nonetheless and I am open to any suggestions regarding different ways to handle the polyphony, playability and maintaining the original "deep" feel of the track.

This is the only arrangement I will be uploading for the project - Thank you in advance!

Sorry for a bit of a change - looking at m15 again at the PDF, it is a little confusing looking from what I recommended.

All good, updated.

One additional recommendation I will make is to add the treble clef into m8 halfway through. This will allow the slur to go a bit lower.

Yes, that works. Updated.

Thank you for the feedback!

Yes... for this I would assume the player is just going lift after playing both E's (and from my own attempt). This is a case where I think I'd be okay leaving the phrasing as is for consistency with the original track, but if you would rather not, you could remove the lower E from that 2nd layer and make it an 8th note length the first layer

The pedal works, I've left it as is.

By all means if you want to add them feel free to, I think it would go well for the RH

I've added phrasing in the upper clef, though it's all just legato.

Thanks for the feedback!

Sorry I forgot to mention earlier it looks like a dynamic marking (p or mp perhaps?) is missing. Everything else looks good!

Updated! I put mp.

Thanks for the feedback!

All I have to add is that fermatas on 16th notes at the end of a piece like this are a little odd, I would recommend adding an extra measure with whole notes (or whole rests, because pedal) and add the fermatas there.

Updated! I removed the fermata, since the whole note is long enough. Is that fine?

Thanks for the feedback!

One final thing from this feedback for m11 - would consider putting parentheses on RH beat 1 as that is going to be a bit difficult to play considering the LH's notes.

Updated! Also, I put parentheses on the low G in m9 upper staff, because it coincides with the one on the lower staff.

Couple other final points:
• I think moving m10 up to the 3rd measure system looks a bit cleaner for the sheet's measure distribution. So 4-3-4-3-3 overall
• m15 RH would look a little clearer on beat 1 with the layers moved like the attached image:

Updated. Though, the systems are now actually 3-3-4-3-3, as they're 16 in total.
Also, I wanted to mention that the E pedal in m16 is a bit complicated to keep, as the hand would have to stretch up to a 10th. Should I change that? And should I also implement some phrasing throughout the whole arrangement?

Thanks for your feedback!

Nice work! Note-wise, the main thing I have to say is that the B's on beat 4 and 4.75 of measure 1 sound like F# instead.

Updated!

For formatting, mind giving this topic a read? The left margin is abnormally large and the footer text exceed the bottom margin. Other than that, the 120 in the tempo marking should be un-bold and you can probably move the composer/arranger info, as well as the top staff, down away from the header a little bit.

Should all be good now.

Thank you for the feedback!

The jingle that plays upon the solution of a puzzle.

Bumping for arranger, are you still around to work on this one?

Yes! I have updated the files.

• You could move the dynamic down a bit so it's more centered between the staffs.
• from m9-16 LH I do hear 5ths or 3rd's of the LH chord root note currently present. For example G's above the C's in m9, and C's above the A's in m10 and A's above the D's in m10.
• m13 to m16 this is not really a viable in the current octave if you choose to do two melody octaves from m9 to the end, but I do hear some held notes like the following (screenshots of m13 and m16)

I moved the dynamic and added the notes. I kept the melody octaves up until m13, where the held notes start. Does that work?