[PC] Symphonic Rain - "Even if Tears Run Down Your Cheeks (Piano)" by Latios212

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: Symphonic Rain
Console: PC
Title: Even if Tears Run Down Your Cheeks (Piano)
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Latios212

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Latios212]

A few notes for this one:
- This is a sheet based off of the piano arrangement of the vocal song from the soundtrack (which you can find here if you're curious), hence the "(Piano)".
- The track is over 6 minutes long, but it repeats quite a bit with some subtle differences between repeated sections. As with other tracks in the soundtrack that do a similar thing, I decided it best to just write it all out as-is with no repeats, especially since the track has a definitive end.
- Despite being a piano piece, the parts aren't actually laid out in a way that is possible to play for a soloist. I've omitted or moved some parts around a bit but otherwise the sheet is transcribed as closely as possible.
- This also isn't playable on solo piano because the original uses notes that are off the lower end of the standard 88-key piano I've written what they should be (who knows if this sheet will find itself in front of a Bösendorfer one day!) but also what to do on a normal piano.

[Maelstrom]

RH:
m13 - I'd recommend leaving the D off of the first chord to give the same feeling of progressing inversions as the original.
The jump down in m71 seems a bit ... extreme. Maybe move the chord up an octave? It's worse than m20 because it's a 16th then a jump.
M23 and similar suffer from the same issue, but not as acutely. Now that I look about it, something being done for m29 would also help.
Big, fast jumps in m84 and similar too.
m99 too.
I think the b3 chord in m100/102 is C-D-E, with no G.

LH:
Any reason why the beams swap directions halfway through m91?

The performance note is nice, but a bit wordy. Could it be pared down some?

[Latios212]

RH:
m13 - I'd recommend leaving the D off of the first chord to give the same feeling of progressing inversions as the original.

Yep sounds good

The jump down in m71 seems a bit ... extreme. Maybe move the chord up an octave? It's worse than m20 because it's a 16th then a jump.
M23 and similar suffer from the same issue, but not as acutely. Now that I look about it, something being done for m29 would also help.
Big, fast jumps in m84 and similar too.
m99 too.

I've played this sheet quite a bit as written - places like 27/29 with the big jump in the span of a 16th aren't so bad - even 84 and similar aren't unmanageable at tempo. The real tricky ones are the ones around measures 90 and 98 because unlike 84, they come from ascending octaves and go into chords rather than dyads. However, given the nature of the piece I really don't want to move either of those parts in order to keep them in the proper range - the pedal and potentially using rubato can save you here. All that said, I've gotten rid of the lower octave on the RH chord in m. 90 and 98 beat 1 to make it easier to play. The rest I'd prefer to leave as is.

I think the b3 chord in m100/102 is C-D-E, with no G.

Agreed, although listening again I think an A could be included as well.

LH:
Any reason why the beams swap directions halfway through m91?

Yes - for this section the upper layer points up where the RH is supposed to play it and down where the LH is supposed to play it.

The performance note is nice, but a bit wordy. Could it be pared down some?

It has been deverbosified

Thanks for checking! Uploaded new files. (I've also adjusted a few ottava lines a bit.)

[mastersuperfan]

- In m10/12/14/16 RH, I also hear an A in the chord.
- In m11/17 RH, I don't think I hear the upper D re-articulated on beat 2.5.
- On m18 and m20 beat 1, I also hear a D in the chord... near middle C, though, so you'd have to transpose it an octave up if you wanted to include it, or you could omit it if you wanted to keep the chords separate from the melody.
- In m21, maybe a subito p or mp plus a crescendo?
- I'm hearing similar notes as above near middle C for the chords in m23-28. I'm assuming you omitted these intentionally?
- I hear a G under the RH on m23/25 beat 4.
- Hm, I think m28 beat 2.5 might not feel as dissonant as the original without the E in the RH as well.
- On m29 beat 3, I would suggest adding the D to the RH chord as well to get the nice adjacent C-D dissonance from the original.
- Er, did you delete the wrong notes by mistake on m43 RH beat 1?
- I would write m17 and m47 the same way.
- You might consider omitting the upper F# on m97 beat 1 since it isn't there in the original.

[Latios212]

- In m10/12/14/16 RH, I also hear an A in the chord.

Yeah, this is a D7b9. I played around with it a bit because the original chord looks something like this...

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

...and this is what I think sounds best. I didn't invert any of the other chord tones up into the RH because I think they distract from the melody D too much.

- In m11/17 RH, I don't think I hear the upper D re-articulated on beat 2.5.

I was having somewhat of a hard time deciding whether these were actually there or not. I still think they are (maybe try lowering the music - the D's will pop out more then). It's also worth mentioning that the vocals in the first verse in the original (0:29) contain a new syllable in the equivalent of m. 11 but not m. 17. (Take this with a grain of salt since the two different tracks don't parallel each other exactly.)

- On m18 and m20 beat 1, I also hear a D in the chord... near middle C, though, so you'd have to transpose it an octave up if you wanted to include it, or you could omit it if you wanted to keep the chords separate from the melody.
- I'm hearing similar notes as above near middle C for the chords in m23-28. I'm assuming you omitted these intentionally?

Yeah, I wanted to keep the chords in range as much as possible, and as in these places I've declined to invert harmonies up in order to put the spotlight more on the melody.

- In m21, maybe a subito p or mp plus a crescendo?

Yeah I like that! Will do for 51 and 72 as well.

- I hear a G under the RH on m23/25 beat 4.

Might be an overtone from the bass playing C? In any case I don't think it needs to be included in terms of sound, so the right hand can keep playing that simple pattern.

- Hm, I think m28 beat 2.5 might not feel as dissonant as the original without the E in the RH as well.

Works for me! I think a five-note chord would work well in this part (58/79/89/97) since it's pretty much the climax of the chorus each time it comes around. Added those E's.

- Er, did you delete the wrong notes by mistake on m43 RH beat 1?

Hm, not sure. I think I wrote in the D to avoid a tenth in the right hand. Do you mean I should write in a B instead for layer 2?

- I would write m17 and m47 the same way.

Ah yeah. Moved the chord back to the LH in 47.

- You might consider omitting the upper F# on m97 beat 1 since it isn't there in the original.

Aghh I thought I had finished this sheet without any c/p errors but here it is in the last comment! >< The melody is just completely absent on beat 1 there (there's no vocal syllable there in the last chorus in the original song either) so I'll just have the RH play the chord at its original position instead.

New files uploaded~ thanks!

[mastersuperfan]

Hm, not sure. I think I wrote in the D to avoid a tenth in the right hand. Do you mean I should write in a B instead for layer 2?

Oh, yeah, I see that the melody is re-articulated here instead of tied like m13. That said, I think a tenth between white keys at a slow tempo like this is fine? And I say this as someone with small hands (and even for someone with small hands, I think it's easy to get it with pedal + a quick roll). So it might be preferable to write a B instead of D in Layer 2 for the same reason that Mael gave for m13. If you don't want to write a tenth, though, that's fine.

(For what it's worth, I think a tenth between white keys is significantly easier than the C-Eb-D on beat 1 of m10.)

Might be an overtone from the bass playing C? In any case I don't think it needs to be included in terms of sound, so the right hand can keep playing that simple pattern.

I hear this really, really prominently. Like, it sticks out really loudly to me, and then the sheet sounds weird to me without it. Every time this figure repeats, I hear a clear A-G-A stepwise pattern on beats 3.5-4.5.

Aghh I thought I had finished this sheet without any c/p errors but here it is in the last comment! >< The melody is just completely absent on beat 1 there (there's no vocal syllable there in the last chorus in the original song either) so I'll just have the RH play the chord at its original position instead.

Guess what, there's one more: the melody also rests on beat 1 of m58.

- On m29 beat 3, I would suggest adding the D to the RH chord as well to get the nice adjacent C-D dissonance from the original.

What about this one?

Also, the 8va in m96-99 is a bit low.

[Latios212]

Oh, yeah, I see that the melody is re-articulated here instead of tied like m13. That said, I think a tenth between white keys at a slow tempo like this is fine? And I say this as someone with small hands (and even for someone with small hands, I think it's easy to get it with pedal + a quick roll). So it might be preferable to write a B instead of D in Layer 2 for the same reason that Mael gave for m13. If you don't want to write a tenth, though, that's fine.

(For what it's worth, I think a tenth between white keys is significantly easier than the C-Eb-D on beat 1 of m10.)

Totally, will do. (I still think the C-Eb-D is slightly easier to play though.)

I hear this really, really prominently. Like, it sticks out really loudly to me, and then the sheet sounds weird to me without it. Every time this figure repeats, I hear a clear A-G-A stepwise pattern on beats 3.5-4.5.

I can hear it a bit more clearly if I listen for it... sure I'll add it in. Not for the similar part in 24 though since the B-A-B movement is noticeably less audible (if present).

Guess what, there's one more: the melody also rests on beat 1 of m58.

oops got it

What about this one?

Oops I skipped over it by accident. I can add the D to both the beat 3 and beat 4 chords in the sections this plays. I've also adjusted the spacing slightly in 90 and 98 since those chords are so close together

Also, the 8va in m96-99 is a bit low.

Gotcha

Also I flipped the ties that were facing the wrong direction in m. 8, 38, and 110, and ever so slightly adjusted the end of the glissando in 83 so it isn't so close to the notehead on the right. New files uploaded, thanks again!

[mastersuperfan]

Looks good to me!

[Maelstrom]

If you can play the jumps as they're written just fine now, I see nothing wrong with them

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Maelstrom.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot