[DELETED] [PC] Deltarune - "BIG SHOT" by PlayfulPiano

[Static]

Hey, quick question regarding this, but why would it be better to classify the intervals as harmonized minor 3rds/major 6ths as opposed to inverted diminished chords in the form of 5-1-3? Is it because the former is more relative to the actual melody note? Or does it not matter either way? I would just like to have a better understanding

That's a good point. I guess what I was getting at is that the intervals don't necessarily have to be m3/M6, moreso that the intervals chosen should be consistent throughout the piece to reflect the chord planing. You could spell the M6 as d7 if you want (i.e. C#-G-Bb in m16 for example). M6 seems a bit easier to read most of the time, even though it does introduce the Bbb.
Diminished and augmented chords can be spelled any variety of different ways because they come in sets of 4s/3s, respectively, and because in this piece they're nonfunctional (don't resolve to anything), how you spell them doesn't really matter.
But because they're all voiced the same way, I think it makes sense to spell them with the same intervals (like m76 for example even though that's a different chord).

Hopefully that makes sense

[Zeila]

That's a good point. I guess what I was getting at is that the intervals don't necessarily have to be m3/M6, moreso that the intervals chosen should be consistent throughout the piece to reflect the chord planing. You could spell the M6 as d7 if you want (i.e. C#-G-Bb in m16 for example). M6 seems a bit easier to read most of the time, even though it does introduce the Bbb.
Diminished and augmented chords can be spelled any variety of different ways because they come in sets of 4s/3s, respectively, and because in this piece they're nonfunctional (don't resolve to anything), how you spell them doesn't really matter.
But because they're all voiced the same way, I think it makes sense to spell them with the same intervals (like m76 for example even though that's a different chord).

Hopefully that makes sense

Taking your example with m16, I think I just over-complicated it or got it wrong because I still interpreted Db-G-Bb and Bbb-Eb-Gb as diminished chords, just with different roots. Anyways, thanks for the explanation! And it makes sense that spelling it as d7 vs M6 wouldn't matter either way in this case

Also yes I do agree with keeping them consistent and writing it more with flats instead of sharps/naturals, I just wasn't sure whether or not it would be better to use a bunch of double flats (there are some Abb's later too) to fit the pattern and make it more noticeable/recognizable, or just keep it as naturals whenever since Playful seemed to think that was easier to read

[PlayfulPiano]

Taking your example with m16, I think I just over-complicated it or got it wrong because I still interpreted Db-G-Bb and Bbb-Eb-Gb as diminished chords, just with different roots. Anyways, thanks for the explanation! And it makes sense that spelling it as d7 vs M6 wouldn't matter either way in this case

Also yes I do agree with keeping them consistent and writing it more with flats instead of sharps/naturals, I just wasn't sure whether or not it would be better to use a bunch of double flats (there are some Abb's later too) to fit the pattern and make it more noticeable/recognizable, or just keep it as naturals whenever since Playful seemed to think that was easier to read

fwiw it's probably more of a divide among "is it easier to read for a more novice performer" vs. "is it easier to read for a more advanced / music theory aware performer".

Since generally more novice/intermediate piano performers would likely have more trouble recognizing an Fb or double flat compared to an advanced performer.

[Static]

fwiw it's probably more of a divide among "is it easier to read for a more novice performer" vs. "is it easier to read for a more advanced / music theory aware performer".

Since generally more novice/intermediate piano performers would likely have more trouble recognizing an Fb or double flat compared to an advanced performer.

This is true to an extent, but sometimes it is actually more appropriate to use Cb, Fb, B#, E#, etc. Like in F# minor for example, when the major V chord is used (C# major), you're not going to write C#-F-G#, etc. This doesn't mean to be as complicated as possible (please don't write things in Fb major), but sometimes the more obscure spellings have their place. Also keep in mind this arrangement is technically very challenging, so beginners aren't probably going to try to learn this at first. You are writing for a somewhat advanced audience here, one that likely has at least a bit of theory knowledge (chords, scales, etc.) to understand what Cb is.

For this piece specifically, I would strongly advice you use Db-Fb instead of Db-En in m9 RH, etc., since augmented 2nds are (imo) actually more confusing and annoying to read than a simple Db-Fb minor 3rd.

If you insist on not using Fb, Cb, etc., the Gb in m14 RH beat 4 should be F#, and the Dbs in m16 beat 3 should be C# - this is to keep the diminished 7th interval consistent.
The reason why I suggested spelling all these with flats in the first place is because F# and C# are outside the key signature, whereas Gb and Db already are. Keeping everything as flats, even if it introduces some double flats, I think ends up being easier to parse for the average reader. Maybe that's just me speaking as a brass player, where much of the literature in any genre is in flat keys. I still think it would be a good idea here though.

Regarding the things you mentioned on Discord:

I'm still not really a fan of beat 3 of your LH accompaniment starting at m9. I just don't hear this downwards contour on beat 3 in any part of the original. Maybe someone else has other ideas. I'd just suggest doing something similar to beat 1.

ok so in regards to this, what I'm personally hearing when listening to the track at beat 3 at 0.5x speed is the drum (idk the right term, uh, when you hit the rim of a drum?) plays in a 16th beat rate that syncs with the melody's downward motion. so I wrote it such that it matches both going downwards. maybe it could be reharmonized to be better w/the melody though. although now I'm hearing an (Ab?) being played a bit towards the end of b3 of m10/12/etc. that gets tied into b4, although I'm not sure

That would be called a rimshot, but I'm not hearing those in this drum pattern. It sounds like kick, snare, and hi-hat mostly. With that said, I can kinda see where that's coming from now.
There is an Ab at the end of beat 3 because it's in the bassline. You can see the bassline I transcribed in my first post. If you really want that downward motion there, just keep what you have already. However, I would still suggest adding that En/Fb on beat 3.75 of m10/12/etc., as well as a note on beat 3.75 of m9/11/etc. to match m10/etc. The bass plays a note there, and the drum pattern is the same at the end of every bar, so there's not much reason to have an 8th note there instead of two 16ths.

m17-24 LH: You can beam beat 1 across if you want to like you had before. Also, the accompaniment on beats 1-2 doesn't really line up with the original (neither do beats 3-4 still but I already went over that). You have beat 1.75 with an added upper note (mimicking the snare), but this hit is on beat 1.5. I would write it similarly to beats 1-2 of m9-16:

besides that I have it written differently here than for m9/16 b/c it's not exactly meant to mimic the snare but rather echo the melody's lower chord

I'm confused as to why you would do that, since there's no part in the original that echoes the melody.

[PlayfulPiano]

Hey sorry for not getting back on this since last week but basically college work is slamming me hard atm. Not sure when I'll be able to have time but it might take a few days.

Good thing is, there's a recent update so this doesn't have the same deadline to be summited at least.

[PlayfulPiano]

This is true to an extent, but sometimes it is actually more appropriate to use Cb, Fb, B#, E#, etc. Like in F# minor for example, when the major V chord is used (C# major), you're not going to write C#-F-G#, etc. This doesn't mean to be as complicated as possible (please don't write things in Fb major), but sometimes the more obscure spellings have their place. Also keep in mind this arrangement is technically very challenging, so beginners aren't probably going to try to learn this at first. You are writing for a somewhat advanced audience here, one that likely has at least a bit of theory knowledge (chords, scales, etc.) to understand what Cb is.

For this piece specifically, I would strongly advice you use Db-Fb instead of Db-En in m9 RH, etc., since augmented 2nds are (imo) actually more confusing and annoying to read than a simple Db-Fb minor 3rd.

If you insist on not using Fb, Cb, etc., the Gb in m14 RH beat 4 should be F#, and the Dbs in m16 beat 3 should be C# - this is to keep the diminished 7th interval consistent.
The reason why I suggested spelling all these with flats in the first place is because F# and C# are outside the key signature, whereas Gb and Db already are. Keeping everything as flats, even if it introduces some double flats, I think ends up being easier to parse for the average reader. Maybe that's just me speaking as a brass player, where much of the literature in any genre is in flat keys. I still think it would be a good idea here though.

Regarding the things you mentioned on Discord:
That would be called a rimshot, but I'm not hearing those in this drum pattern. It sounds like kick, snare, and hi-hat mostly. With that said, I can kinda see where that's coming from now.
There is an Ab at the end of beat 3 because it's in the bassline. You can see the bassline I transcribed in my first post. If you really want that downward motion there, just keep what you have already. However, I would still suggest adding that En/Fb on beat 3.75 of m10/12/etc., as well as a note on beat 3.75 of m9/11/etc. to match m10/etc. The bass plays a note there, and the drum pattern is the same at the end of every bar, so there's not much reason to have an 8th note there instead of two 16ths.

I'm confused as to why you would do that, since there's no part in the original that echoes the melody.

I have the arrangement here updated (up to m25) with the changes you mentioned including your bassline (with some slight alterations). I also decided to keep the En and instead implement C#s where necessary (I didn't add in the thirds for b3.75 of like m9 and so forth in the right hand because I feel it would be too difficult to play those notes in quick succession, unless I read what you were suggesting wrong).

I didn't go past m24 for right now because I'm still not quite sure on the new bassline's sound especially in later points, so I want to see what you think before going forward with making the same adjustments for the rest of the arrangement.

[Static]

I didn't add in the thirds for b3.75 of like m9 and so forth in the right hand because I feel it would be too difficult to play those notes in quick succession, unless I read what you were suggesting wrong

I was referring to the LH there. What you have in the RH is fine.

The changes you made look good overall, though I'm not hearing those additional harmonies on beats 1-2 of m9-16 RH. Although they are harmonically correct, I think you should save those additions for m45.
In m17-24 LH, you can beam beat 1 together, or alternatively change beat 1 to a whole note and put it in a separate layer. I think just combining it all into one layer is fine here though.

Feedback on the later sections to come soon, but go ahead and copy over those accompaniment patterns to use for the rest of the arrangement. Nice work so far.

[PlayfulPiano]

I was referring to the LH there. What you have in the RH is fine.

The changes you made look good overall, though I'm not hearing those additional harmonies on beats 1-2 of m9-16 RH. Although they are harmonically correct, I think you should save those additions for m45.
In m17-24 LH, you can beam beat 1 together, or alternatively change beat 1 to a whole note and put it in a separate layer. I think just combining it all into one layer is fine here though.

Feedback on the later sections to come soon, but go ahead and copy over those accompaniment patterns to use for the rest of the arrangement. Nice work so far.

Hey static, just wanted to let you know that while this has definitely improved compared to the original rendition / went through a lot of revisions already, I'm going to shelve this arrangement for right now so I'm able to use this submission slot for other arrangements (in part because I'm in a major caves & cliffs mood, and just that I've sort of gotten to the point of this arrangement of just wanting it done and dealt with through making as many changes without personal preference as to get it approved and finished).
Also because a lot of heavy college work took me out of the arranging focus, and then coming back to this became more frustrating than a source of stress relief.


I'll definitely submit this back once I've done the full fixes for the left hand phrases though, probably during winter break.

[Latios212]

As with last time on Discord, I feel like I have to put another reminder here...

Please be considerate and respectful of the updaters` time.

This submission is a prime example of not doing that. We had previously discussed:
(1) not rushing your arrangements to end up submitting something that requires a lot of work to fix, and
(2) not incessantly asking for immediate attention when updaters are busy as there are a lot of other submissions to attend to.

I won't go into those right now. But there's a third thing too:
(3) putting in the work to improve the sheet.

Yes, motivation and free time come and go - but by submitting an arrangement you are committing to putting in the required work to bring it up to site standard with help from the community. Updaters review sheets with the expectation that we will work together to finalize them for the main site. It is perfectly understandable to occasionally put a submission on hold due to realizing the amount of work that is needed vs. the amount of time available. But to see this submission with so much work poured into it suddenly be deleted, by someone who has abandoned a nonzero number of submissions completely in the past, can feel like a slap in the face to someone trying to help.

Please keep this in mind for future submissions. Thank you.