[SW] Pokémon Scarlet & Pokémon Violet - "Title Screen 2" by Th3Gavst3r

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Pokémon
Game: Pokémon Scarlet & Pokémon Violet
Console: Nintendo Switch
Title: Title Screen 2
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Th3Gavst3r

[Th3Gavst3r]

"Title Screen 2" comes from the Pokémon Scarlet ・ Violet + The Hidden Treasure of Area Zero Super Music Collection

[cashwarrior1]

What the heck??? This exists???

[Latios212]

The very last track on the OST!

Feedback:
- You could just use one slur going over the phrase in m. 2-3 starting with the grace notes, if you want. Putting the initial slur under the grace notes makes it a bit harder to count the ledger lines. On a somewhat similar note, I'd suggest putting the slur in m. 11-12 over the melody instead of under to correctly capture the descending contour.
- m. 6 beat 3 sounds rolled
- The chord in the LH of m. 7 beat 1 sounds like C-Fn-G ascending
- m. 9 LH beats 2-2.5 sound like F#-G
- How about sustaining the LH D through the rest of m. 14 instead of a rest?
- m. 16 beat 2 LH C sounds an octave up
- Thoughts about including the low bass F on beat 4 of m. 18 instead of the D? Or you think that's too much of a jump without much payoff? (Sneaky composers passing this off as a piano solo...)
- m. 21 RH beat 2.5 - not sure I hear the upper octave G prominently?
- m. 22 beat 1 - I hear this chord with a G on top rather than the C on bottom
- In the last measure, you could combine the half rests and put it and the quarter rest at normal mid-staff height.

[Th3Gavst3r]

- You could just use one slur going over the phrase in m. 2-3 starting with the grace notes, if you want. Putting the initial slur under the grace notes makes it a bit harder to count the ledger lines. On a somewhat similar note, I'd suggest putting the slur in m. 11-12 over the melody instead of under to correctly capture the descending contour.

Good advice, especially about the contour. I couldn't pin down why that looked strange before. I always thought that grace notes were supposed to have their own slur separate from the phrasing slur, but it definitely looks better with just one.

- m. 6 beat 3 sounds rolled
- The chord in the LH of m. 7 beat 1 sounds like C-Fn-G ascending
- m. 9 LH beats 2-2.5 sound like F#-G

You right

- How about sustaining the LH D through the rest of m. 14 instead of a rest?

Sure, looks good to me

- m. 16 beat 2 LH C sounds an octave up

Sounds pretty similar in bassiness to the C2's on beats 1 of m. 11,12,15,22 to me. And also sounds deeper than the C3 on m.7 b.1

- Thoughts about including the low bass F on beat 4 of m. 18 instead of the D? Or you think that's too much of a jump without much payoff? (Sneaky composers passing this off as a piano solo...)

I did consider using the middle F, but the jump between m.20 and m.21 is actually even bigger so I guess the low F is fine lol

- m. 21 RH beat 2.5 - not sure I hear the upper octave G prominently?

I wasn't sure whether to include it or not. I kept thinking I heard it but when I'd listen closer I couldn't make it out anymore, so it might just be my brain filling in the melody. If you didn't hear it either I'll take it out

- m. 22 beat 1 - I hear this chord with a G on top rather than the C on bottom

This is another situation like the last one where I'm hearing a ghost G on top. On inspection I hear the low C more clearly than the high G, even though in passing I keep thinking I hear a faint G on top

- In the last measure, you could combine the half rests and put it and the quarter rest at normal mid-staff height.

Yeah that looks better

[Latios212]

- m. 16 beat 2 LH C sounds an octave up

Sounds pretty similar in bassiness to the C2's on beats 1 of m. 11,12,15,22 to me. And also sounds deeper than the C3 on m.7 b.1

Hm, I'm still hearing it higher up. I think the low C from the beginning in m. 15 is still resounding at this point, might that be the low C you hear? Raising the pitch an octave, it sounds like the higher C has a notable strike here.

- m. 22 beat 1 - I hear this chord with a G on top rather than the C on bottom

This is another situation like the last one where I'm hearing a ghost G on top. On inspection I hear the low C more clearly than the high G, even though in passing I keep thinking I hear a faint G on top

I still think I hear the upper G here as well... lowering the pitch by an octave, I still hear it up top. It's also what my ear is drawn to when listening at full speed.

Nonetheless, I can't say for 100% that you're not right about these couple of notes either. I will approve since everything else looks good! If the next updater could check these couple spots in particular, that'd be appreciated~

[Th3Gavst3r]

I opened up some audio analysis tools and it does look like that's a C2 in m.16. Plus it shortens one of those crazy jumps so I raised it up. I still don't see a trace of the high G in m.22 though, so I left it the same chord as before

[XiaoMigros]

Notes:

• m6: Not hearing the Eb at beat 1 RH
• m7: Hearing C4 instead of G at LH beat 1, and a C3 at beat 2.5
• m9 & 13: The B at beat 1 in the RH sounds an octave lower
• m10 & 14: The Bb at beat 1 in the RH sounds an octave lower
• m11: I think I hear D4 at beat 1?
• m15: I hear Bb3 and D4 instead of F4 at beat 1
• m18: The high LH Bb could be cross-staved? The beam can stay below the staff as to not add extra clutter
• m18: Beat 4 in the RH should have a D instead of F
• m23: I hear additional A3s at beat 3 and possibly 4.5

Presentation

• m2: Thoughts on making the RH lower layer part of the LH? I think it's most comfortable to play that way and also visually looks better. You could start using the treble clef in m1 as well
• m7: The tuplet number in the LH seems too high up (in the PDF at least)
• m5, 9, && 11: Very nitpicky but these markings could be more appropriately centered between staves. The text expressions can also start slightly before the notes

[Th3Gavst3r]

Notes:

• m6: Not hearing the Eb at beat 1 RH

I guess the bass already has an Eb, so that one isn't important and I removed it

• m7: Hearing C4 instead of G at LH beat 1, and a C3 at beat 2.5

The C4 does sound better, but I can't figure out what you're talking about with the C3 on beat 2.5. There aren't any notes at all on beat 2.5, and I don't hear any other C3s aside from what's already written

• m9 & 13: The B at beat 1 in the RH sounds an octave lower
• m10 & 14: The Bb at beat 1 in the RH sounds an octave lower

Sure

• m11: I think I hear D4 at beat 1?

Maybe, but that would be very difficult to play coming out of those chromatic 16th notes the beat before

• m15: I hear Bb3 and D4 instead of F4 at beat 1

I guess the Fn can come from the LH on beat 2 instead, but Bb3 and D4 would be impossible to play

• m18: The high LH Bb could be cross-staved? The beam can stay below the staff as to not add extra clutter

If moved cross-staff, that Bb causes a lot of visual clutter with the B naturals on beat 4

• m18: Beat 4 in the RH should have a D instead of F

In the original, it's an impossible D4. When raising it to a playable D5, I thought an octave+3rd on beat 4 was slightly jarring coming from a unison Bb on beat 3, and that doubling the root instead sounded smoother. But you do lose the D completely with that approach, so I've changed it back.

• m23: I hear additional A3s at beat 3 and possibly 4.5

Playing an A3 on beat 1 is impossible, and lowering it to an A2 muddies the rest of the base contour significantly. And I don't hear any new strikes on beat 4.5

Presentation

• m2: Thoughts on making the RH lower layer part of the LH? I think it's most comfortable to play that way and also visually looks better. You could start using the treble clef in m1 as well

I thought it would come across that layer 2 was intended to be played with the LH, but if you use a treble clef that whole part fits comfortably into the bottom staff anyway

• m7: The tuplet number in the LH seems too high up (in the PDF at least)

Yeah it looks like Finale snaps the number to just outside the staff for some reason. I moved it down a little bit

• m5, 9, && 11: Very nitpicky but these markings could be more appropriately centered between staves. The text expressions can also start slightly before the notes

I'm assuming you meant m10 instead of 11? Adjusted all of those

[XiaoMigros]

I can't figure out what you're talking about with the C3 on beat 2.5

It sounds quite faint, but not less faint than certain notes included elsewhere. Leaving it out works for me too
Sure

If moved cross-staff, that Bb causes a lot of visual clutter with the B naturals on beat 4

It looks okay to me at least (see attachment) and has the added benefit of showing it should be played by the RH, but again up to you

Playing an A3 on beat 1 is impossible, and lowering it to an A2 muddies the rest of the base contour significantly. And I don't hear any new strikes on beat 4.5

Sorry, I meant beat 3. Think I still hear 4.5 as well but it is rather faint.

Let me know your final thoughts on these and then I can accept!

[Th3Gavst3r]

It looks okay to me at least (see attachment) and has the added benefit of showing it should be played by the RH, but again up to you
Sorry, I meant beat 3. Think I still hear 4.5 as well but it is rather faint.

Oh I looked at that comment before changing the Fn to D, which made it look way more cluttered before. I think moving the Bb to the upper staff is fine, but flipping the beam downward moves the duration information extremely far away from the pitch information, so I think leaving it upwards is better.

Sorry, I meant beat 3. Think I still hear 4.5 as well but it is rather faint.

I still don't hear either, and adding an octave on beat 3 seems out of place in a contour that's otherwise simple and fading out

[XiaoMigros]

That all works for me! accepting shortly...

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by XiaoMigros.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot