[N64] The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time - "Dinosaur Boss Battle" by Olimar12345

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: The Legend of Zelda
Game: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
Console: Nintendo 64
Title: Dinosaur Boss Battle
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Olimar12345

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Olimar12345]

[JDMEK5]

I recall doing an arrangement of this myself quite a while back. Actually not much is different here than I had in mine iirc, aside from me opting for F#s more than Gbs but whatever. Only two things I have to offer:

-Measure 6, RH: Would you not be opting for a G# on beat one? Since it resolves chromatically upwards to the A natural? One reason I thought you may have consciously done this would be to avoid using sharps in a passage so ridden with flats, but that didn't seem to stop you in measures 11-14.
-Since the original features a piano playing in octaves in measures 35-end, why not add that in here? I've actually test driven these octaves myself and I can vouch for their includability. 

[daj]

So having requested and played this, I'd like to chip in on this a bit haha ^^

-Measure 6, RH: Would you not be opting for a G# on beat one? Since it resolves chromatically upwards to the A natural? One reason I thought you may have consciously done this would be to avoid using sharps in a passage so ridden with flats, but that didn't seem to stop you in measures 11-14.

I would have loved to see a G-sharp here, but since this is atonal-ish (it's not btw), we take whatever harmonic idea we have and make it consistent: in this case, the only idea is the augmented 4th/diminished 5th. Olimar chose the diminished fifth/"flat-mode" over the augmented fourth/"sharp-mode", and it's consistent throughout the piece. Even at the section which suggests E minor, he ignores that and throws in G-flat over F-sharp.

Personally I'm used to seeing augmented fourths represented over diminished fifths, because sharps tend to be better at illustrating resolving tendencies (i.e. sharps tend to go up and that's normal, flats go down and that's less normal). But Olimar recognised this idea and kept it consistent, so it's okay

-Since the original features a piano playing in octaves in measures 35-end, why not add that in here? I've actually test driven these octaves myself and I can vouch for their includability.

yes please haha i would have loved playing some soft octaves. Would have been nice contrast with the previous section too ^^

[Olimar12345]

The files in the OP have been updated.

-I originally withheld the chromatic pitch (sharp/raised pitch) to help the reader with the LH. I switched it back to being chromatic and instead changed the LH tritones to augmented fourths, not only addressing my concern here, but aiding in differentiating between the LH tritones and LH perfect fifths at a glance.
Scratch that, those measures outline the harmony of fully diminished seventh chords. I've adjusted the spelling to reflect that now.

-I had only the lower octave at the end to make it sound more like it was dropping down an octave, not like it was just adding the lower octave.

-I also found some wrong notes in the previous version and corrected them.

[JDMEK5]

Alright well with all that done it looks good to me.

[Static]

I agree with the accidental spellings here, except for m15-22. In bars like 15-16, you should either use Gbs or F#s, don't switch between the two between measures. I would personally just use F#s in place of the Gbs.

In bars like 17-18, the chromatic runs should be parallel with the previous ones. So, I would write the RH part as F-E-Eb, especially since there's an Eb in the LH part as well. The D# doesn't make too much sense here.

Also, the F# accidental isn't needed on beat 1 of measure 1.

[Olimar12345]

I agree with the accidental spellings here, except for m15-22. In bars like 15-16, you should either use Gbs or F#s, don't switch between the two between measures.

Measure 15 is a repeated descending chromatic figure, while 16 is an alternation between only two notes. Logically speaking, why would I want to write it any other way? Keeping the spelling all Gb's makes measure 16 alternate between G natural and G flat (accidentals on every note), while using only F#'s makes measure 15 alternate between F#'s and F naturals, OR E sharps and E naturals (LH).

In bars like 17-18, the chromatic runs should be parallel with the previous ones. So, I would write the RH part as F-E-Eb, especially since there's an Eb in the LH part as well. The D# doesn't make too much sense here.

Sharps ascend, flats descend. The D-sharp makes perfect sense.

Also, the F# accidental isn't needed on beat 1 of measure 1.

That's a courtesy accidental, I just don't use parenthesis because they're unnecessary and waste space (and look dumb).

[Static]

Measure 15 is a repeated descending chromatic figure, while 16 is an alternation between only two notes. Logically speaking, why would I want to write it any other way? Keeping the spelling all Gb's makes measure 16 alternate between G natural and G flat (accidentals on every note), while using only F#'s makes measure 15 alternate between F#'s and F naturals, OR E sharps and E naturals (LH).

Fair enough. It looks weird but I think overall its a lot easier to read anyway so yeah.

Sharps ascend, flats descend. The D-sharp makes perfect sense.

Since the notes are descending here (F-E-Eb), wouldn't Eb make more sense though? I might be wrong on this, but normally down downwards chromatic passages you normally use flats. The D# does make the part a lot easier to read, so I guess it's fine if you keep it. If you're going to use the D# there though, I think you should make the LH part a D# as well, for simplicity.

That's a courtesy accidental, I just don't use parenthesis because they're unnecessary and waste space (and look dumb).

Oops, yeah that makes more sense considering the first accidental is on the grace note.

[Olimar12345]

Since the notes are descending here (F-E-Eb), wouldn't Eb make more sense though?

Eb to F ascends though. Plus, you would need to neutralize the E before using it again, making more accidentals than this way.

[Static]

OK, I see now, cool. I would just change the Eb in the bass to a D# then.

[Olimar12345]

done.

[Olimar12345]

bump are we ready to go with this one?

[Static]

Discussed over Discord, this one's definitely ready.

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Static.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot