[3DS] Fire Emblem Awakening - "Destiny" by Maelstrom

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Fire Emblem
Game: Fire Emblem Awakening
Console: Nintendo 3DS
Title: Destiny
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Maelstrom

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Maelstrom]

[Latios212]

I meant to check this before going to sleep but it got late... so here are a few thoughts at a skim. Honestly I thought it might sound a bit empty in places but I tried them out on the piano and they work pretty nicely.

- Really suggest using higher inversions (or something) of the chords in m. 39-42, they have a much thicker texture than the surrounding sections and the original isn't that muddy
- I think m. 43 would make more sense in 3/2 than 6/4
- your hairpin crescendos are quite wide
- Is there a way we can avoid the huge rolls in m. 55-57 without messing up either melodic line too much?
- Spacing is a bit weird on some of the measures on the last page (chord is far too close to the barline to the left of it)
- Alternate measures in the end section are missing a repeated hit on beat 1.5 similar to m. 64. You might also want to make the E's octaves so it doesn't sound as empty

[Latios212]

Some more miscellaneous stuff as I look more closely through it, in addition to the above:
- I think the beginning might be better in triads... I hear triads in the original and the arrangement sounds a bit more empty without them. Measure 1 is Esus, measure 2 misses the E root on beat 1, etc.
- I assume using the 5th instead of the root in the accompaniment at the beginning is for a more varied sound?
- mf too close to the barlines in m. 23
- I think the melody in m. 23 beat 3 is restruck
- Including the lower D in the triplet at the end of m. 25 in the RH feels kind of odd because it interrupts the motif there
- The melody is unresolved at the beginning of m. 35 - write an octave for the first D
- The accompaniment seems rather light/high in m. 43-50... I would consider things like octave doubling the bass notes above, or writing the dyads as triads?
- m. 51 beat 1 (and maybe the other beat 1s here) would sound nicer with the harmonies filled out in the RH more.
- C#s in m. 52-62 section should be Dbs
- cresc. in m. 54 is very wide, one in 66 could be extended a bit
- Would recommend writing in the lower staff in m. 63-64 instead of cross staff brackets
- Measure 66 beat 1 sounds rather empty with just three B's

didn't get to checking the last page very closely yet

[Maelstrom]

Reword chords in m43-54, should be more accurate now. Will probably give the whole song a further once over today.
yes, the 5th note in the intro was intentional.

I made every other change except the huge rolls. I can't seem to thing of a way to have them all without damaging either the melody or countermelody's motion beyond recognition. 

[Latios212]

Cool, let's see...

- C#s in m. 52-62 section should be Dbs

m. 62 as well

- Would recommend writing in the lower staff in m. 63-64 instead of cross staff brackets

Don't think you really need a clef change in 63, it's just a G

- Measure 66 beat 1 sounds rather empty with just three B's

- Alternate measures in the end section are missing a repeated hit on beat 1.5 similar to m. 64. You might also want to make the E's octaves so it doesn't sound as empty

Think you might have missed these

[Maelstrom]

files updated

[Libera]

Firstly let me say that I think this is a very tricky piece to arrange and you've made pretty good stab at it.  In general the map themes of Awakening are nightmares to arrange for piano so I hope all the criticism below doesn't make you feel bad.  I do however think this arrangement needs a bit more work in general to get it sounding/feeling right.


I'll say some general things before I get into specifics.  Overall I think this arrangement is generally quite empty compared to the original, although it's better than when I last looked at it with the additional harmony in places.  Most of my comments that aren't accuracy related are geared towards alleviating this and trying to get the arrangement to sound fuller.  I'd also like to say that I think that this arrangement could use more dynamic variance.  At the moment, the loudest dynamic is forte and the quietest mezzo piano.  I'd recommend widening this range to try and get some more nuance into the dynamics.  Some examples: 67-74 could be more starkly contrasted with 75-82, the crescendo could be bigger in 39-42 etc.

Page 1:
-I hear different notes for left hand beat 3 in nearly all of bars 1-8.  Bar 1 I hear an E, bar 2 a G etc.  Most of them are octaves and definitely not fifths.
-Bars 17-20 are very empty compared to the original.  I can see why you omitted the triplet pattern, but I'd recommend trying to include the strings here so it's not just a single line above a single note bass.  Particularly bar 20 sounds really empty, rhythmically and harmonically.

Page 2:
-There's an amazing harmony line here that mostly moves in sixths below the melody here and I think this section loses out massively by its omission.  Particularly the resolution onto A major in bar 24 is currently only hinted at by the passing C# in the left hand, but would be made completely clear by including the extra harmony here.  Again I think including this would go a long way towards making this section less empty and fuller.
-I don't think you should cut off the melody in bar 28 right on the final beat, it makes that line sound really odd.  I'd recommend instead finishing it on the correct A and then taking over with the new line at the start of 29.  You could still keep the D as harmony if you wanted, but I think you should preserve the ending of that melody.
-I think the first layer A in bar 30 beat 3 should still be an F like in bar 26.
-It'd be nice if there was a way to get across that bars 35-36's RH is not a melody part.  Perhaps a dynamic or something like that?
-In contrast to the rest of the arrangement, bars 39-42 feel way too heavy.  This is section is pretty quiet in comparison the other stuff and yet it's by far the thickest texture in the entire arrangement.  Generally I'd really recommend making this section lighter if you can, but I'll post some specifics in the next few comments.
-I don't hear anything below the top G F Eb in bars 39-40 in the original.
-I'd highly recommend removing the octaves in the melody in bars 39-41.
-I don't hear the parallel thirds in bar 40 at all.
-There's a Bb in bar 40 that moves up to a C on beat 4 (the Bb below middle C that is, although you could put it in the RH also.)
-I'd consider removing the A in the left hand in bar 41.  The A is not that low in the original and you have it in the RH anyway for harmony purposes.  I think it sounds too muddy with the lower power chord there.
-The lower F in the RH of bar 42 beat 1 should be a G.
-Missing an Eb in the RH of the second chord of bar 42.
-I don't hear a low F in the first chord of bar 42.  I'd just write that bar's left hand as octaves or single notes (the lower ones obviously).

Page 3:
-I don't hear these Ds in the left hand of bars 43-37.  It sounds pretty much the same as 55/59 where you wrote Cm.
-Not super sure about bar 45/49 but the loudest note I can hear on these backbeats is a C, which is omitted.  The third of the chord is pretty important to include I think.
-You include the countermelody in bars 55-62 but not in bars 43-50.  Is there a particular reason?  While you'll see my thoughts about including the countermelody in 55-62 further down, I do think the RH could do with a bit more here than just octaves.  Particularly in bar 50 where there is no movement whatsoever in the right hand.
-I'm hearing lots of different notes/harmonies to what you wrote in for bars 51-54.  Could you have another look over this for me?  Particularly there are no parallel sixths in bar 51 (parallel thirds instead), missing Abs in bars 52/54, G on beat 1 of bar 51 etc.  There are lots so I don't want to go through them all really.
-The crescendo in bar 54 should go through all the way to the end of bar 54.
-The top C should restrike on beat 3 of bar 54.
-I'm not a huge fan of the giant rolls in bars 55-57.  I think they are unnecessarily difficult to perform in a non-clunky way and only succeed at preserving the exact octaves of the countermelody which I'm not sure is that important all things considered.
-Speaking of the countermelody, including it in full I think makes this section very awkward and difficult to read.  I would really strongly consider condensing the countermelody into the main part wherever possible (which is in quite a lot of places), or removing it altogether and using it to fill in harmony for the RH.  Particularly places like bar 58 gain practically nothing from being written out in this way and it'd look far simpler if the countermelody was condensed into the melody.  If you still really want to keep it, I'd at least recommend messing around with the positioning of the noteheads manually so that they don't interfere with each other as much.
-Again the top C of bar 61 should restrike on beat 3.
-The rhythm in the right hand of bar 62 doesn't sound right.  I think it should go along with the triplets.

Page 4:
-Bar 63 has the same last note as bar 64 in the left hand.
-The lowest notes in bar 65-66 should be staccato crotchets like in bars 63-64.
-In general there's definitely some muddling of voices/confusion about what's going on in bars 65-66.  Let me give a picture.

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

The melody line in bars 65-66 should have an A on beat 2 of bar 64.  (The A on beat 1 actually goes down to the F# on beat 3 and isn't part of that line, so the way it's currently written is kind of confusing voice wise but that should be easy to clear up if you move the current lower layer down to the left hand.)  I'd then move the D# on beat 1 of bar 66 into the second layer and then add the F# on beat 3 of that same voice.
-Again I think it's important to resolve that sweeping violin line in bars 65-66 when you go into 67 rather than dropping it down to some other voice.
-General comment about bars 67-74: I think you should include the part that's exactly (I think) the same as the one in bars 75-82 (but quieter).  At the moment, this section doesn't really sound much to me like the original when I listen along because it's missing that interesting melodic movement that the original (while quiet) still has.  There's also no reason to have to miss out the strings you've written in with the chords since these phrases always start on beat 2.  Definitely consider this.
-Speaking of chords: bars 70-71 I wouldn't double the D, especially not at the top of the chord.  The A should be a G and there should also be an E in here still.
-Bars 71-72 there should still be an E.
-Same for bars 73-74 and there's also more movement in the strings here than written in.  However I don't think it's more important than the line previously mentioned and currently omitted.
-Again in 75-82 you could use thicker harmony from the strings (that you haven't included yet) here like in 67-82.
-I'm not really sure what's going on with beat 4 in the left hand for bars 67-82.  I don't hear this at all and it sounds more like it should be another E or just not there at all.  I'd also suggest using something lighter than three notes on beat 3 because it's not really that heavy in the original.


I am almost certainly going to need a second look at this once the edits start coming in.

[Maelstrom]

-I hear different notes for left hand beat 3 in nearly all of bars 1-8.  Bar 1 I hear an E, bar 2 a G etc.  Most of them are octaves and definitely not fifths.

This was completely intentional, lat addressed it too.

>-I don't think you should cut off the melody in bar 28 right on the final beat, it makes that line sound really odd.  I'd recommend instead finishing it on the correct A and then taking over with the new line at the start of 29.  You could still keep the D as harmony if you wanted, but I think you should preserve the ending of that melody.
So I messed with this a bit and it doesn't sound weird to me. This is because the A is far quieter than the D pickup for m29 and that D->A motion has always been far more memorable to me than the that of the strings in m28. I would like to keep it as is, but understand what you're getting at here. I extended the slur from 29 to the pickup to more clearly indicate what it's doing. 

-m30 - I would like to keep b3 as it is, because, first, I don't hear the F, and 2nd, that would end up making that chord a 5th, breaking the pattern here in a very unsatisfying way.

Revisited 39-42 heavily. I distinctly hear the strings playing the Eb and G I wrote in. I think it's quite a bit better than it was before now.

I think the Ds I were hearing in 43+ were actually Cs so I revised the chords to better reflect that.

I did things to the counter melody to get it to work without ever getting rough to play. Most of the time, I just added in the string chord to the octave when it wasn't the octave already. When it was, I added a note that made sense given the part and the melody's movement from the previous notes

Killing the huge rolls worked better than I thought

>-Bar 63 has the same last note as bar 64 in the left hand.
Don't hear this at all, sorry
>The melody line in bars 65-66 should have an A on beat 2 of bar 64.  (The A on beat 1 actually goes down to the F# on beat 3 and isn't part of that line, so the way it's currently written is kind of confusing voice wise but that should be easy to clear up if you move the current lower layer down to the left hand.)
Assuming you meant 65 here. I respectfully disagree as I can't hear a restrike at all. I would be willing to take out the D if you really want, but I do not hear any real change in sound between b1 and b2 of m65.

I strongly disagree on m67-74. I think it sounds pretty close to the original and would like to keep it as is. Yeah, it might be a bit empty, but it feels right to me and contrasts more strongly with 75-end. And using ped. to hold the chords long enough would do funky things to the bassline.

Sorry for this disaster of formatting, hope it makes sense and that I actually got everything you said this time

everything I didn't mention was hopefully addressed, files updated

[Libera]

Thank you for making edits so quickly.  I think it looks a lot better, particularly bars 17-24.

This was completely intentional, lat addressed it too.

Not sure I really understand the rationale behind changing this note(s).  If it was somewhat hidden under other stuff I could maybe understand, but these changes stick out a lot to me since they're completely exposed (being the only thing happening on beat 3 in most of these bars).

So I messed with this a bit and it doesn't sound weird to me. This is because the A is far quieter than the D pickup for m29 and that D->A motion has always been far more memorable to me than the that of the strings in m28. I would like to keep it as is, but understand what you're getting at here. I extended the slur from 29 to the pickup to more clearly indicate what it's doing.

Hmm I still think it's not a good idea to throw away the end of that phrase but I guess it's at least more honest in its representation.

Revisited 39-42 heavily. I distinctly hear the strings playing the Eb and G I wrote in. I think it's quite a bit better than it was before now.

Partially my fault for writing this feedback in a confusing way.  Let me give a picture with what I was imagining:

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

Also I'll just mention here that I think that bar 42 should be written in 3/2 rather than 6/4 (in terms of divisions/beaming).

With respect to the new 43-50, it looks a lot better now I think.  Although the final note of bar 50 should be an F rather than an Eb.  Also that same part plays the same F on beat 1 as well there.

Bars 51-54: it looks like some things were changed but I'm still hearing some things differently.  I'd highly recommend including the G on beat 1 of bar 51, since that is the voice that progresses to the parallel thirds on beat 3.  Five notes is probably too many for that chord, but I think the G is more important doubling the Bb. 
-Still hearing Abs in bars 52-54.
-The left hand should go down to the Db rather than up to it (both times).
-Hearing additionally F->G on beats 1/2 - 3/4 in bar 54.

If you're going to write 59-61 like that, it would be a lot better in two layers.  Currently that is even harder to read than before.  I was trying to recommend more of condensing than that, which is why I suggested one layer, but if they're going to stay that separate I don't think it's a good idea.

Assuming you meant 65 here. I respectfully disagree as I can't hear a restrike at all. I would be willing to take out the D if you really want, but I do not hear any real change in sound between b1 and b2 of m65.

As I said I think you're confused about the voicing here.  The A on beat 2 is not a restrike, it is the start of the melodic line (as I indicated in my picture).  The A on beat 1 moves down to an F# on beat 3.  You could write that A in lower if you wanted to avoid the restrike of the A confusing the melody here.  My picture in the previous post still shows exactly what I'm trying to say I hope.

Re: bar 63 beat 4, yeah I thought I could hear this last night but I was probably just sleep deprived.

I strongly disagree on m67-74. I think it sounds pretty close to the original and would like to keep it as is. Yeah, it might be a bit empty, but it feels right to me and contrasts more strongly with 75-end. And using ped. to hold the chords long enough would do funky things to the bassline.

Ok.  This section still feels like its lacking any motion to me.  Probably best to get another opinion.

Beat 4 of bars 67-82 (LH)?  You didn't mention anything but nothing has changed.

[Maelstrom]

So I can't hear the Abs well and adding them to m53 makes it sound really muddy, but not adding it makes m52 and m53 sound much stronger so I'm just leaving them out.

Did everything else. I understood what you were saying about m65, but didn't want it to sound like a restrike. I originally thought I heard the violin coming in on b1 but now I hear it on b2. Updated and with the initial A an octave lower.

As for m67-end, I somehow missed your comment. I can hear a voice hitting that 4th beat 95% of the time in m67-74 and it sounded like it was just being drowned out in the others as there was no consistency. It sounds like a piano strike )or whatever is a counter melody to layer one in the 2nd half of the page)( in the background and adds some texture to it. I, however, don't hear it in m75-end so I removed it there. Files updated.

[Libera]

Also that same part plays the same F on beat 1 as well there.

^Bar 50.

As for m67-end, I somehow missed your comment. I can hear a voice hitting that 4th beat 95% of the time in m67-74 and it sounded like it was just being drowned out in the others as there was no consistency. It sounds like a piano strike )or whatever is a counter melody to layer one in the 2nd half of the page)( in the background and adds some texture to it. I, however, don't hear it in m75-end so I removed it there.

I think what you're hearing is one note out of the line I was trying to get you to write in for this section.  (It plays a D on beat 4 of bars 68 and 70 so this is what I assume is happening).  I can't hear anything else there (maybe some repeated Es very occasionally but none of these C#s/Ds etc.)

The positioning of the dynamics could be a little neater.  Just try and centre them under their respective notes so that they're not too close to the barlines or notes.

You never said anything about 35-36.  Did you want to put this at a lower dynamic to emphasise that it's not the melody but an accompaniment?  Also, are bars 23-38 really all the same dynamic?

The D.C. should be higher up above the notes in that bar.

I still think the A in the chord in 69-70 should be a G.

Hearing very different chords in 75-82.
75-76 Em7sus4.
77-78 Em7
79-80 A  (This one is already right but maybe you could put a C# on beat 1 of 79.)
81-82 Am7 -> Am add#6.

[mastersuperfan]

Some stuff while I'm here, too:
- m18 RH Layer 1 beat 3, I hear the A as a restrike instead of being tied over from beat 2.

So I messed with this a bit and it doesn't sound weird to me. This is because the A is far quieter than the D pickup for m29 and that D->A motion has always been far more memorable to me than the that of the strings in m28. I would like to keep it as is, but understand what you're getting at here.

- I know this comes down to personal differences in how we hear it, but I have to hard disagree with this point here. The string line there was always super prominent to me, while I honestly never even noticed that D until I specifically listened for it now. 100% agree with Libera that the high string A should be written in instead of D m28 RH beat 4.
- Why not have the high string D on beat 1 of m33 RH?
- m36 RH, second-to-last note, I very clearly hear a C (C5) instead of E.
- Also completely agree with Libera that you should include the background string line in m67-74. Right now, that phrase just feels so bland and... boring, honestly, and not at all characteristic of the original track. This is what I'm hearing:

Image

[close]

[Latios212]

So I messed with this a bit and it doesn't sound weird to me. This is because the A is far quieter than the D pickup for m29 and that D->A motion has always been far more memorable to me than the that of the strings in m28. I would like to keep it as is, but understand what you're getting at here. I extended the slur from 29 to the pickup to more clearly indicate what it's doing. 

For what it's worth I agree with what Maelstrom wrote here... the high string line seems supplementary to what I see as the main melody line which is lower, so I would prioritize the pickup to 29 as well. Though, your call Mael given the above comments with the other opinion.

[Maelstrom]

Libera:
The thing I feel most strongly about now is leaving m29 as I have it written. I have made all other changes, except for adding the C# in m79 because it's played on b2 and allows the chord to be held longer.

MSF:
>m18
Nope, don't hear the restrike at all no matter how hard I try. It's just not there.

discussed for far too long over discord
files updated