[SWITCH] Xenoblade Chronicles 2 - "Garfont Mercenaries" by Libera

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Xeno
Game: Xenoblade Chronicles 2
Console: Nintendo Switch
Title: Garfont Mercenaries
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Libera

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Libera]

[Latios212]

Thanks again for doing this one and sorry for the wait for checking. I really love the dominant flat 9 chords used in this one. I've also played through this a bunch of times since you originally posted it and it's quite nice aside from a couple of awkward parts (mentioned below).

- For beat 2 of m. 1 and 2 I'm hearing a a lower note ascending to the following 16th notes - that is, E in m. 1 and G# in m. 2. I assume the notes you wrote in correspond to the top notes of the chords being re-struck but I think this lower line should be preserved as well.
- I think beat 1 of m. 8 would do better with an A instead of (or in addition to) an F# under the melody - it's there in the original and fills out the chord a bit. It sounds a bit empty there right now. Same for m. 38.
- Measure 13's beat 3-4 sounds strange with the top melody shifted around to fit with the lower countermelody. I'm hearing this for the original:

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

Could you use something more resembling that, potentially opting to drop something like the 16th note pickup in the lower layer?
- m. 16/30 half note should point upwards
- I think a mordent (or triplets) would be better for m. 20 beat 1.5 to better clarify that the figure starts on the beat (it's super easy to miss the appoggiatura given the surrounding notes)
- m. 25 LH beat 3.25 is missing a B 16th note to bridge the A and C#
- Although the Fx in m. 28 makes the LH ascent look nicer, I think it'd make more sense as a Gn given it plays an Em7 chord there
- The second chord in m. 28 sounds like Amaj (E instead of F# in the RH)
- For m. 30 I just hear the melody play a half note D (instead of E-D)
- I think the guitar line in m. 32-33 would sound better at its original octave, but your choice. The guitar also bends its pitch down to the next note on each beat X.25 in m. 33 and I think I would write those in, but I can see why you might not want to.
- As with m. 13, the top voice in beat 4 of m. 43 should be a lower E.

[Libera]

- Measure 13's beat 3-4 sounds strange with the top melody shifted around to fit with the lower countermelody. I'm hearing this for the original:

Spoiler

You cannot view this attachment.

[close]

Could you use something more resembling that, potentially opting to drop something like the 16th note pickup in the lower layer?

Yes this was a simplification because the one handed polyrhythm is very awkward to play.  I can put back the E on beat 4 though if that makes it any better though.

- For m. 30 I just hear the melody play a half note D (instead of E-D)

This was me swapping the voice at the top because the guitar line is more interesting here.  I can see why that's probably confusing though so I've adjusted that section.

- I think the guitar line in m. 32-33 would sound better at its original octave, but your choice. The guitar also bends its pitch down to the next note on each beat X.25 in m. 33 and I think I would write those in, but I can see why you might not want to.

The issue I saw with this is the voicings at the end of the phase in bar 32/beginning of bar 33 (putting the guitar line down an octave hides it below the chords) and also would make the chord at bar 35 an octave lower (or you hide the resolution again).  That was my reasoning for doing it like this and I still think it's the best option here.  With regard to the bends, I can't see someone performing that in a way that doesn't just sound like a bunch of messy semiquavers.  I don't think it works on piano in this setting.

- The second chord in m. 28 sounds like Amaj (E instead of F# in the RH)

The F# is in the violin, Gn -> F# from the previous chord.  I don't hear the E.

Hopefully I've addressed your other points in my edits.  Thanks for checking.

[Latios212]

Yes this was a simplification because the one handed polyrhythm is very awkward to play.  I can put back the E on beat 4 though if that makes it any better though.

Looking again this makes a bit more sense to me than it did last night. I think it was the combination of the E in the upper layer missing and the C# in the upper layer being aligned with the triplet that threw me off. That said, I think what you have now works.

The issue I saw with this is the voicings at the end of the phase in bar 32/beginning of bar 33 (putting the guitar line down an octave hides it below the chords) and also would make the chord at bar 35 an octave lower (or you hide the resolution again).  That was my reasoning for doing it like this and I still think it's the best option here.  With regard to the bends, I can't see someone performing that in a way that doesn't just sound like a bunch of messy semiquavers.  I don't think it works on piano in this setting.

Yeah this is fine just wanted to share my opinion on how I would have written it

The F# is in the violin, Gn -> F# from the previous chord.  I don't hear the E.

Ooh yeah, got it the high F# - I hear that. I was listening to the harmony below the melody and listening to it again, whatever is playing there sounds like it outlines an A7 chord (which makes sense going to Dm in m. 29). For that reason I think writing it as an A or A7 chord in the RH sounds better on piano. I'll leave that up to you (or the next updater to comment on) though since it's not incorrect as is.

Oh, last thing I forgot to mention last time - you may want to glue those beats in the RH back together in m. 19 and 22 (idk why Finale breaks those beams by default when you add grace notes).

Everything else looks good, so approving

[Maelstrom]

RH:
m2 b4.75 - hearing a C# here
m6 - On b1, I hear the bottom note of that chord as a F#, and a E-A-B chord on b2.
m10 - Same thing as m6 on b1, b1.5-2 I hear a voice descending F#>E. I hear it ascending in m42 so I might be hearing it wrong.
m12 - I hear the counter melody descending on b2, as a G# instead of the B
m30 b2.75 - I hear a E here instead of the G. I get how this might not mesh well with the chord after it though.
m36 - same deal as m6 b1.
m40 like m12 as well

LH:
m17 - I hear b4's lowest note as a B.
m19 b2 - I hear almost the same chord from m15 here. Maybe not the C#, but def. the B so maybe the C#could just move down a step.
m36 - If you're following the guitar instead of the bass on b4, might as well include the E on b3.5 as well.

Might seem like a lot but it's not that much honestly. You did a fantastic job translating this incredibly dense song to piano.

[Libera]

Ooh yeah, got it the high F# - I hear that. I was listening to the harmony below the melody and listening to it again, whatever is playing there sounds like it outlines an A7 chord (which makes sense going to Dm in m. 29). For that reason I think writing it as an A or A7 chord in the RH sounds better on piano. I'll leave that up to you (or the next updater to comment on) though since it's not incorrect as is.

I still don't hear the E or Gn.  I think you may just be being thrown off by the chord being in first inversion with the A in the bass.  I've left this as is again since Mael didn't mention this either.


Thanks for checking, those are some nice catches. 

m12 - I hear the counter melody descending on b2, as a G# instead of the B

I see what you mean but I also still hear the B.  I think for simplicities' sake (you're right that it doesn't do it in bar 42) I'll just keep it to the B.

m30 b2.75 - I hear a E here instead of the G. I get how this might not mesh well with the chord after it though.

I agree.  I think though to avoid the double tap of the E I will just omit that final note.

m19 b2 - I hear almost the same chord from m15 here. Maybe not the C#, but def. the B so maybe the C#could just move down a step.

I agree about the B.  Not sure about the C# but I think for consistency with bar 15 it'd be better to keep it.

m36 - If you're following the guitar instead of the bass on b4, might as well include the E on b3.5 as well.

So I'm open to changing this but one of the ways I was trying to make 5-14/35-44 lighter than 15-24 was by omitting that note.  It's so thick anyway that it's a bit fiddly to try and get the fuller sound out in 15-24 and this was one of the small alterations, as well as extra notes on the left hand chords and octaves in the melody in some places.  As I said I'm open to altering so let me know what you think.

Other things should be fixed and new files are up.

[Maelstrom]

Looks great!
I agree with everything you said and don't hear what lat said at all, so I'll accept then.

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Maelstrom.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot