So a couple of questions about some changes I was going to do, just enharmonic spelling stuff.
- measure 30/42, I have B natural for the left hand, but I think it would look better as a Cb?
- measure 37, I have an Ab for the left hand, but should it actually be a G#?
And a change I'm more certain on doing is raising the last couple of 8th notes for the left hand in measure 31, for a smoother transition with the next measure.
Thanks for the feedback!
- Will add change to measure 3 when I have access to my computer. I have a feeling I missed that due to copy/pasting the previous measure, haha.
- I'm assuming you're talking about the left hand rhythms around measures 6-16, in which case, I changed the 16th notes to 8th notes not because of it being "difficult," so much as it sounding and feeling awful to play repeated notes like that on piano. Same reason that I alternate octaves for the left hand triplets in the first few measures.
- So it is actually possible to include the bass and keep the left hand part for the section around measure 10, you would just have to use the right hand to play the top notes that are currently in the left hand's section. However, I felt like for the average user that uses this site, it would be better to just present that section more simply with "main melody with the right hand" and "accompaniment with the left" instead of splitting layers for more voices. Also, not having the bass early on makes for a better contrast with measures 18 and 45.
- Yup, nailed it! The piece has to end with one more round of the main melody, but it would be monotonous to play it exactly the same way a third time, so for the left hand I decided to have the phrase at measure 10 be based on the horn accompaniment, while for measure 45 the left hand derives from the bass parts. This was my compromise instead of putting the bass notes at measure 10; I would just save the bass notes until the end so that the performer would have something new to learn for the last section.
- Similar to what I did above, I held off the harp part at measure 26 because the same part is in measure 36, so the "contrast" is just displayed in different sections than what you had in mind. How someone decides to play it is up to preference, but the advantage of having it this way is that if they do want to play the harp part for measure 26, they can just look down to measure 36 as a reference, but if I overwrote it myself, they would lose the chords that are currently in measure 26 if they wanted to play the chords instead.
So, most of the suggestions are more about a difference in arranging style. If you or others feel that those kinds of changes would make the sheet more comfortable to play or make it sound significantly better, I'll implement them, but for now I don't see a reason to change it up.
- measure 30/42, I have B natural for the left hand, but I think it would look better as a Cb?
- measure 37, I have an Ab for the left hand, but should it actually be a G#?
And a change I'm more certain on doing is raising the last couple of 8th notes for the left hand in measure 31, for a smoother transition with the next measure.
Quote from: InsigTurtle on July 23, 2018, 11:12:40 PMJust a quick glance:
- m.3 sounds like you could add the triplet into the bass on beat 3
- I notice you simplified the rhythm somewhat, for playability reasons I suppose. At the given tempo, I wouldn't say it's too difficult to play, though.
- Also noticed how you neglect the bass in favour of playability, but incorporating a bit of the bass notes would help make the accompaniment more interesting
- Just to clarify, the sparse texture in m.45 is you adding a sort of "ending" by adding contrast to the beginning, right?
- I'd suggest adding the harp part to m.26-29 so you can contrast more with m.30
Thanks for the feedback!
- Will add change to measure 3 when I have access to my computer. I have a feeling I missed that due to copy/pasting the previous measure, haha.
- I'm assuming you're talking about the left hand rhythms around measures 6-16, in which case, I changed the 16th notes to 8th notes not because of it being "difficult," so much as it sounding and feeling awful to play repeated notes like that on piano. Same reason that I alternate octaves for the left hand triplets in the first few measures.
- So it is actually possible to include the bass and keep the left hand part for the section around measure 10, you would just have to use the right hand to play the top notes that are currently in the left hand's section. However, I felt like for the average user that uses this site, it would be better to just present that section more simply with "main melody with the right hand" and "accompaniment with the left" instead of splitting layers for more voices. Also, not having the bass early on makes for a better contrast with measures 18 and 45.
- Yup, nailed it! The piece has to end with one more round of the main melody, but it would be monotonous to play it exactly the same way a third time, so for the left hand I decided to have the phrase at measure 10 be based on the horn accompaniment, while for measure 45 the left hand derives from the bass parts. This was my compromise instead of putting the bass notes at measure 10; I would just save the bass notes until the end so that the performer would have something new to learn for the last section.
- Similar to what I did above, I held off the harp part at measure 26 because the same part is in measure 36, so the "contrast" is just displayed in different sections than what you had in mind. How someone decides to play it is up to preference, but the advantage of having it this way is that if they do want to play the harp part for measure 26, they can just look down to measure 36 as a reference, but if I overwrote it myself, they would lose the chords that are currently in measure 26 if they wanted to play the chords instead.
So, most of the suggestions are more about a difference in arranging style. If you or others feel that those kinds of changes would make the sheet more comfortable to play or make it sound significantly better, I'll implement them, but for now I don't see a reason to change it up.