[MUL] Castlevania: Curse of Darkness - "Eneomaos Machine Tower" by Atcero

[Static]

There's a few things here I still hear as it was before (this is just copied from the discord convo I had with msf the other day so it doesn't get lost):
- m19: I still hear the B in these chords, but the B on beat 1 could still be swapped for F, doesn't really matter
- m28 beat 4: I still hear the G here
- m29: No E here, it's just Fmaj instead of Fmaj7
- m40: I don't hear the C#
- m41: The B doesn't move to A here
- m44: I still hear the Bn here (Cmaj7 chord)
- m48 beat 1: I still think the E is on top here, the chord voicing is the same as beat 3

Some additional things:
- m30 LH: Bb should be Bn (you could also change the Ebs to D#s, but it's an augmented 7th chord here - it can be spelled many correct ways - Eb is fine I think)
- m58 LH: bass sounds like E here

This is just what I'm hearing at least

[Atcero]

Finally Updated, but a couple things:

For M30 RH, that B sounds completely off for me. Bloop helped me and they said they couldn't hear it either but for me that chord in playback sounds wrong.

For M48 LH, I did not hear that C# for the base and when I checked on the piano, it sounded like E-A-E-B

M50 LH, the D-A-D chord also sounded wrong. I removed the A just so it wasn't so dissonant.

For M60 I kept the C octave as when Fitkah played it, he was able to do it. With that, if people can't play it, they can always just not play it imo. For 83-89, I kept the chords the same as Static and I discussed it.

Thank you both!

[mastersuperfan]

- I see what you're doing with the voicings in m32 RH, but the layering is a bit confusing and it hardly changes the way that someone would play it (not to mention that I think the voicings are arguably ambiguous in the original too)—I would strongly suggest condensing the RH into a single layer.
- Same goes for the layering in m37-39—it's really confusing because it looks like it's a single layer with five beats per measure. Also m40 LH beat 2 should be flipped down.
- The struck note on m42 RH beat 1 should probably be in its own layer; otherwise it's extremely easy to miss.
- Move the dynamic in m53 a little to the right (to be centered with the notehead) and a little down (so it's not so close to the RH beam).
- Dynamics in m69 and m73 are too close to the barline. Also, space could be widened between the staves in both places because there are near-collisions happening here (mp and stem in m69 and crescendo and beams in m72).

For M60 I kept the C octave as when Fitkah played it, he was able to do it. With that, if people can't play it, they can always just not play it imo.

- How did he play it? The problem is that it's physically impossible to play it as written, which makes it notationally ambiguous. If he only held it down for the duration of a sixteenth or eighth note then it might be more accurate to represent it as such.

I can get the tempo marking afterward.

Also, if there are any other suggestions that you chose not to incorporate besides the ones you mentioned in your previous post, it might be helpful if you could indicate which ones they were.

[Atcero]

Updated

[mastersuperfan]

All right, one more check for the road. This should be everything, barring any minor issues that pop up as a result of the edits you make now.
- Maybe raise m5-8 RH up an octave? That sounds more accurate to the original to me.
- The half note m24 RH beat 1 would probably look better with the stem upwards, to be consistent with beat 3.
- Courtesy F natural on m27 RH beat 1?
- On m29 RH beat 1, the F in the chord sounds like it should be an E instead (A minor chord in RH, F in the bass).
- Any reason why m32 LH beat 4 is different from LH beat 2? The B makes more sense to me on beat 4 because the F# is already in the RH, and the third is pretty muddy down that low.
- m32 RH beat 3 should be flipped up. After you do that, make sure to move the crescendo up too.
- m39 LH beat 2 sounds to me like there's a C# on top instead of an F# in the middle. The F# sounds fine though if you want to keep it that way though.
- For m43 LH, it might be better to use Bb instead of G to avoid having a dissonant tritone in the LH.
- IMO the end of m44 LH (beats 3-4) is abruptly too thick compared to previous beats; I wouldn't include a fifth on every single note. Up to you though.
- There should be an 8va over the RH from the end of m44 to m52.
- On m46/50 LH beat 2, I would suggest using F# instead of B. The B is already held by the RH, and the B feels too high to me, i.e. it sounds like the low register is lost. (Might also apply to m62 LH beat 2 if you want to use D instead of G, but I think this one is also fine as is because it's lower than m46/50.)
- Courtesy natural on m47 LH beat 1?
- m47 LH beat 4 seems like it should use G instead of F#; F# isn't part of the chord here.
- On m55 RH beat 1, I would strongly suggest changing the F# to a D#, or including a D# in addition to the F#. The D# is really important to the chord here (more important than the F#). I would also suggest including D# on beats 2 and 3 too.
- m56 RH beat 1 should use D# instead of D.
- For m54-58 RH, I think it would make sense to fill out of the chords since this is a pretty powerful-sounding part of the track and the LH is only playing single notes most of the time. This would mean adding F# to m54 beat 3, A to m54 beat 4, the aforementioned changes to m55, B to m56 beats 2-3, G to m56 beat 4, F# to m58 beat 1, and B to m58 beat 3.
- m59 would look cleaner condensed into one layer, which wouldn't sacrifice anything because it's not possible to hold that half note during the chromatic scale anyway.
- For m60 beats 1-2, it would look better and more consistent with beats 3-4 if Layer 1 were flipped up and Layer 2 were flipped down (and the Layer 1 rests were placed above the staff).
- Crescendo in m67 could be lowered a bit.
- The crescendo/decrescendo should extend all the way to the barline in m59 and m67 since they continue into the next system.
- Forte in m61 should be moved up a bit so that it's aligned with the crescendo in m60.
- Dynamics in m69 and m73 should be moved a bit right; right now they're really close to the barline.
- On second thought, I think m69 would look clearer with the half rest shown... that's what I'll suggest now, but either way is okay.
- Courtesy flats for m63 LH?
- It sounds very abrupt for the octave to jump so suddenly from m62 LH beat 4 to m63 LH beat 1. I would suggest either raising m62 LH beats 4-4.5 an octave or lowering m63 LH an octave, i.e. pick an octave and stick with it.
- m64 RH beats 1-2 should use An instead of Ab.
- If you wanted to give m64 LH some more punch, you could add an F to LH beat 2.
- Just like m62 beat 4 to m63 beat 1, same note about being consistent with the LH octave from m64 LH beat 4 to m65. I would move m64 LH beats 4-4.5 down an octave; right now it sounds much higher than m65.
- Seems like m65 LH beat 2 bottom note should be Ab instead of G? Not sure where G comes from anywhere.
- m65-67 LH would be a looot easier if you transposed down the top notes on beats 2/4 down an octave...
- Any reason why m67 LH beat 4 doesn't have a D on top?
- m69 LH is inconsistent with the LH pattern in the surrounding measures... is there a reason for that? The low register sounds like it plays the same pattern throughout in the original, so it would make sense for these places to be like the other measures (e.g. single notes except for beats 2 and 4 which have octaves + fifth).
- m70/74 LH beat 4 sounds like it should use D instead of C; I think G is the root of the chord here, instead of it being an inversion of C minor.

With all that said, let me address this:

HOWEVER: If this song does need too much work for this sub period or if I shouldn't attempt something this higher of a skill level than what I got, please let me know.

Ultimately, I think this ended up being the case. This one is on us for not recognizing and acknowledging this at the start when you mentioned it in your post, but in general I think it would be better to focus on sheets that are less complex (especially ones with less hard-to-identify chords and more well defined accompaniment patterns, since chords and improvised accompaniment patterns are challenging in general). Sometimes your sheets have received a lot of feedback close to an update deadline, and it's true that it is on us to provide feedback in a timely manner, but it's also important to be cognizant of how much work some sheets might require if you attempt something above your skill level (and to be honest, a lot of tracks in general are above almost everyone's skill level). Looking back at the volume of feedback that Static and I gave on this sheet, I think it would be healthier and more productive for both you and us if you arrange tracks that are more accessible and can provide a better learning experience for you.

[Atcero]

Ok got everything updated but these:

- On m46/50 LH beat 2, I would suggest using F# instead of B. The B is already held by the RH, and the B feels too high to me, i.e. it sounds like the low register is lost. (Might also apply to m62 LH beat 2 if you want to use D instead of G, but I think this one is also fine as is because it's lower than m46/50.)
- m47 LH beat 4 seems like it should use G instead of F#; F# isn't part of the chord here.
-It sounds very abrupt for the octave to jump so suddenly from m62 LH beat 4 to m63 LH beat 1. I would suggest either raising m62 LH beats 4-4.5 an octave or lowering m63 LH an octave, i.e. pick an octave and stick with it.

For that B, I can hear it and it sounds not as full without it, so I just added F# and kept the B.

For m47, I still disagree. I relistened to it and I still cant hear that chord resolving properly.

for m62, I raised the 4.5 an octave but kept 4 the same so its not as much of a jump. Let me know if this works cause for me at least I think the lower octave for beat 4 sounds really nice and still is playable.

Thank you!

[Latios212]

- m47 LH beat 4 seems like it should use G instead of F#; F# isn't part of the chord here.

For m47, I still disagree. I relistened to it and I still cant hear that chord resolving properly.

I would go with MSF's recommendation here. If I understand correctly, the goal of the harmonies in the left hand here is to outline the chord, and that doesn't change mid-measure here; it stays as a G. Having B-F#-B as a power chord leading into the E looks right at a glance but it doesn't represent what is actually happening harmonically - m. 47 is a G chord and m. 48 is an A chord, despite the E octave you've written in on beat 1 that presumably represents another non-bass voice. The F# is out of place, and one other thing to consider is that if you're playing this with pedal the F# will clash with the G played earlier.

While I'm here looking at this section, m. 51 sounds like an A major chord, so I think the left hand should have C# instead of C and A instead of G.

Just skimming the rest, there are a few weird spacing issues here and there. I recall last time you having difficulty getting Finale to apply the default spacing? Some places to point out are:
- Accidentals in b4 of m. 12
- Accidentals in b3 of m. 43
- m. 60

And some more purely visual pointers:
- In m. 4 and 81 you should show the quarter rest in the lower layer. It would also help to flip the group of16th notes on beat 2 upwards because there's nothing directly above it - this would allow you to not have to push the crescendo so close to the bottom staff.
- Is there a reason why the 16th notes in m. 59 aren't flipped downwards?
- You have extra space on the last page and in the last system. By contrast the first system on page 5 has 6 measures in it. I would suggest pushing m. 81 down to make the last three measures more evenly spaced.

[Atcero]

All updated, thank ya!

[mastersuperfan]

Edited the files with a couple of spacing/formatting fixes... and I think it looks good!

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by mastersuperfan.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot