[SNES] EarthBound - "Smiles and Tears" (Replacement) by XiaoMigros

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: EarthBound/Mother
Game: EarthBound
Console: Super Nintendo Entertainment System
Title: Smiles and Tears
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: XiaoMigros


Replacement Information:
Links to Existing Sheet: MUS | MIDI | PDF
Replacement Type: Challenge (new arranger)

[XiaoMigros]

layers go brr

[Latios212]

Note for others: Radiak and I are discussing this sheet in depth over DMs and we'll post here once the three of us have the next draft of the sheet ready

[Latios212]

To confirm that this submission has not been forgotten about - Radiak, Xiao, and I have been making good progress going through this sheet at various points over the past few months. Should have stuff to show here sometime soon(ish)!

[XiaoMigros]

..aand ta-da! thanks both for the extensive time reviewing

[Kricketune54]

Sorry for the extended wait on feedback - this seems very well arranged, and thanks to everyone involved (Dad's included).

• m1 it sounds to me like the LH restrikes on beat 3.5 but that restrike holds to end of m2.
• m34  RH 2nd layer 4.0 you probably could manually adjust the Gn so it's sharing the same spot as the first layer Gn.
• In similar vein at m72 and 80, maybe you could hide the tie in RH 2nd layer between 2.5 and 3.0 (can have both layers' ties overlap visually).
• m72 LH swap beat lengths for 1.0 and 1.5

Don't have too many specific things as you can see, but I kind of want to look a little more at a few measures, before approving. Just need to finalize my thoughts on some spots where it's a bit more arranged, but I don't want to be too driven by personal preferences.

[Latios212]

To confirm that this submission has not been forgotten about - Radiak, Xiao, and I have been making good progress going through this sheet at various points over the past few months. Should have stuff to show here sometime soon(ish)!

..aand ta-da! thanks both for the extensive time reviewing

I apologize for not posting in here earlier with any details, but yeah there was a lot of back and forth that would have unfortunately taken forever on the forums. I'm satisfied with this sheet in its current state and am almost ready to approve. A few small final things as I scan through the PDF:
- Overlapping noteheads need readjusting in m. 34 beat 4
- The cross-staff beams in m. 44-47 could use a bit of adjusting, in particular having m. 46 first half angle up and maybe adding a bit more space between staves so the latter ones in m. 45/47 don't overlap the top staff?
- I forget if Radiak had any final thoughts about the "I miss you" in m. 89, but I'm fine with it as written.
- Some notes/accidentals are a bit squished like in m. 49/51 (between beat 2.5-3), 81 (between beats 2.5-3) and 86 (the natural), mind checking the spacing is all up to date?
- (I do think crediting the dads in the special thanks section is a bit excessive ahaha)

[XiaoMigros]

• In similar vein at m72 and 80, maybe you could hide the tie in RH 2nd layer between 2.5 and 3.0 (can have both layers' ties overlap visually).

I don't think I agree with this, I think it should be clear the notes are tied in each layer

The other changes have been made, thanks for reviewing

Just need to finalize my thoughts on some spots where it's a bit more arranged, but I don't want to be too driven by personal preferences.

If you have any thoughts by all means share them!

- The cross-staff beams in m. 44-47 could use a bit of adjusting, in particular having m. 46 first half angle up and maybe adding a bit more space between staves so the latter ones in m. 45/47 don't overlap the top staff?

I don't think there's enough vertical space available to move them outside the staff, but you're right about the angles being off so I adjusted those

- (I do think crediting the dads in the special thanks section is a bit excessive ahaha)

This was a joke and has been removed (forgot)

[Latios212]

I shall leave my approval then ^^

[Radiak488417]

We're so cloooooose!!!!

-m70 RH beat 3: I'm not entirely sure what extra information is conveyed by having the F# in both layers at once, I'd vote for removing it from layer 2.

-m91 beat 1.5: Personally I think the layer 2 G here distracts from the melody and it's pretty quiet in the original, thoughts on taking it out? In our Discord sessions I recall removing a lot of other similar background notes that repeat melody notes.

- I forget if Radiak had any final thoughts about the "I miss you" in m. 89, but I'm fine with it as written.

Yeah, I still pretty strongly disagree with notating this as distinct pitches since it's just spoken and not really meant to be a sung/played line. I proposed these 3 options in Discord but I'll reshare them here:

 Option 1

[close]

 Option 2

[close]

 Option 3

[close]

[XiaoMigros]

-m91 beat 1.5: Personally I think the layer 2 G here distracts from the melody and it's pretty quiet in the original, thoughts on taking it out? In our Discord sessions I recall removing a lot of other similar background notes that repeat melody notes.

I moved this down an octave instead

I proposed these 3 options in Discord but I'll reshare them here:

We're still awaiting others' thoughts...

[Kricketune54]

Radiak could you reshare the images? I do not see them it them and following the links says "content unavailable".

[Radiak488417]

Radiak could you reshare the images? I do not see them it them and following the links says "content unavailable".

Whoops, apologies. Here they are for real this time:

Option 1

[close]

Option 2

[close]

Option 3

[close]

[Kricketune54]

I don't think I agree with this, I think it should be clear the notes are tied in each layer

Okay that's fine

If you have any thoughts by all means share them!

After looking stuff over again, I don't have any issues.

Whoops, apologies. Here they are for real this time:

Thank you, and I think I like option 1 would be best. Agreed on the exact pitches not needing to be sung

[XiaoMigros]

Thank you, and I think I like option 1 would be best. Agreed on the exact pitches not needing to be sung

We settled on a mix of option 1 and what I had previously, as the time signature didn't exactly match the actual measure duration and made the sheet a little more clunky.