[PC] S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky - "Bandit Radio" by Altissimo

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Clear Sky
Console: PC
Title: Bandit Radio
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Altissimo

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Altissimo]

notes:
-i dont know jack shit about this game so the composer credit is likely wrong atm because I found out about 2 seconds ago from knowyourmeme that the piece is based off this - maybe, since this vid is 2011 and the original game is 2008 - so lmao if anyone has any idea what is the truth would be appreciated
-this is a rough draft i pulled together in less than 2 hours so it's not really done. More specifically I'm not 100% sure all the harmonies in the LH are correct and even if they are if how they're written is the best way to play them. Comments appreciated!

[Altissimo]

bump

[Altissimo]

i should clarify that even though the quote box says "its not really done" i do know the melody is correct and had latios check a few of the bass chords so it's basically as good as *i* can get it before i get comments from others lmao

[Maelstrom]

Alright, those chords are technically right, but the wrong inversions.
Here is a straight transcription of the first 3 chords (in the first 6 measures) without your adjusted octaves:

Spoiler

[close]

Given this, you have 4 options:
1: Go with what you have, even though it's not quite right. Probably not the best one.
2: Adjust the octaves for playability. Will bring them a bit too close together. Ok choice.
3: Leave it as I just wrote it. Will make it harder to play. Best choice if playability is not a concern. Otherwise, not that great.
4: Be creative. I'm sure there's another possibility, but I don't know it now.

[Altissimo]

Playability is a concern, which is why I chose to do it the way I did. I feel it kind of ruins the sound of the piece to bring the octaves closer together, which is why I shied away from that option. This might be the one piece where I'm far less concerned about note-perfect accuracy and more concerned about actual pianistic arranging (i.e. playability), so if possible I'd like to keep that as the greatest consideration for this. I wouldn't mind changing the way it's written if there is some sort of compromise, though - I just don't know what that would look like. :/

[Altissimo]

bump

[Altissimo]

btw I recently learned this on piano and at tempo it would have been basically impossible to jump over an octave in order to play it the way maelstrom wrote it, just pointing it out

also i had to make some adjustments to the music in order to make it playable for me, here is a file that i edited to show the differences. namely:

m. 32 is now in the style of the rest of the piece, thirds rather than 6ths
in m. 34 and 35 the bass G and its accompanying G-B dyad has been moved up an octave. This is because I discovered it was easiest for me to play this section by having the left hand do the lowest notes and the right hand do both the treble staff and the dyads in the bass staff, which fit within an octave.

these aren't edits that i'm necessarily making to the piece for its submission, they're just edits i made for playability reasons and i figured i'd share

[Maelstrom]

I'm fine with how the bassline is at this point.
A few things:
You can fit another system on the first page with a little squishing, but that's up to you
m16 crescendo doesn't quite line up with the forte
final measure - FF is colliding with barline
m37-44 RH - Maybe make those 8ths staccatoed quarters to minimize clutter?
m26, 28, 30, 32 RH - Idk how to feel about the high trumpet being added. It sounds really weird when you don't include all the notes. Maybe leave it out altogether?

[Altissimo]

I'm fine with how the bassline is at this point.

meaning which one, the original or the edit I did in the post above yours?

You can fit another system on the first page with a little squishing, but that's up to you

I kind of like it as is because of the way the hypermeter is, tbh.

m16 crescendo doesn't quite line up with the forte
final measure - FF is colliding with barline
m37-44 RH - Maybe make those 8ths staccatoed quarters to minimize clutter?

All of this has been fixed.

m26, 28, 30, 32 RH - Idk how to feel about the high trumpet being added. It sounds really weird when you don't include all the notes. Maybe leave it out altogether?

It's there to differentiate mm. 25-32 from 17-24 because otherwise you can't really hear a difference in the two sections. But if you think it sounds weird, then eh. I removed it.

[Maelstrom]

meaning which one, the original or the edit I did in the post above yours?

The way it is now.

I'm fine with your hypermeter decision.

[Static]

Neat arrangement here, just a few tiny things left to do:

- I would beam the LH parts that currently aren't (like on the first page) just for consistency with the rest of the 8th note groupings.
- A courtesy accidental would be nice to have in m20 and m28.
- You might want to either add more space above the first system on page 1 or just respace all the systems on page 1 to eliminate that empty space towards the bottom of the page.
- Not really necessary, but if you want to, you can include the 16th note dyads in some spots in place of just 8th note ones in the LH in m17-32 and m45-56 to match the guitar thing that comes in there.

Nice work!

[Altissimo]

- I would beam the LH parts that currently aren't (like on the first page) just for consistency with the rest of the 8th note groupings.
- A courtesy accidental would be nice to have in m20 and m28.
- You might want to either add more space above the first system on page 1 or just respace all the systems on page 1 to eliminate that empty space towards the bottom of the page.

Done.

- Not really necessary, but if you want to, you can include the 16th note dyads in some spots in place of just 8th note ones in the LH in m17-32 and m45-56 to match the guitar thing that comes in there.

Tbh I'm not really hearing where these are. I admit I haven't listened super closely but I'm just not sure what it is. (Also I think the song might be too fast for 16ths to work too well lol)

[Static]

Also I think the song might be too fast for 16ths to work too well lol

After testing this out and listening again, I think it works fine the way you have it. What you have is definitely much easier to play, which I think is good for this sheet.

Great work!

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Static.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot