[3DS] Fire Emblem Fates - "Bubbles" by Libera

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Fire Emblem
Game: Fire Emblem Fates
Console: Nintendo 3DS
Title: Bubbles
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Libera

[attachment deleted by admin]

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Libera]

[Latios212]

Thanks for doing this one! It's one of my favorite Fire Emblem pieces, it's so... different from everything else.

I don't really have much to say about the sheet. It's sort of a weird piece to write for piano due to the duration and subtlety of the harmonies, but I think the way you presented it plainly works. There are a few places I'm having a bit of trouble following the harmony/countermelody, most notably the upper voice in m. 30-35. But the harmonies sound fitting everywhere I can't easily pinpoint them exactly, especially closer to the end.

Visually, I think the tempo marking is a bit close to the segno. The dynamics in 38/54 and the rit. in 80 could be nudged left a bit. But really everything looks good to me

[Bloop]

Notes all look good to me! One general thing I can comment on is about notating when which hand takes the middle voice. Up to m32 it's pretty clear, but after that the "L.H." markings get a bit rarer, which sometimes makes it unclear at first glance when the L.H. needs to take over the middle line. For example, in m32 it's clearly notated that the L.H. plays the middle voice, and in 33 it's clear that it should (mostly) go back to the R.H., but at 34 it's in the R.H. staff while the L.H. needs to play it. In that case, something like this should look a bit clearer:
You cannot view this attachment.
Of course, the player can make most of these decisions themselves too, but it just saves them some time and effort to figure out where these places are and what notes should be moved to the L.H.

Aside from that, these little points:
-m31: Nothing wrong here, but maybe it's slightly more comfortable to put the C on beat 2 in the L.H. as well?
-m54 and 75-77: Dots from dotted notes shouldn't be separated from their notes with other notes (as it currently looks like it applies to the quarter notes), so either of these ways to notate it may look better:
You cannot view this attachment. or You cannot view this attachment.

[Libera]

I don't really have much to say about the sheet. It's sort of a weird piece to write for piano due to the duration and subtlety of the harmonies, but I think the way you presented it plainly works. There are a few places I'm having a bit of trouble following the harmony/countermelody, most notably the upper voice in m. 30-35. But the harmonies sound fitting everywhere I can't easily pinpoint them exactly, especially closer to the end.

Since Bloop didn't have any concerns I suppose this is OK.  I did have another look at the specific place you mentioned (30-35) and I can follow what I was going for, although the notes aren't in the correct octave (so that they can sit above the ostinato).  Let me know if you have any other concerns regarding this.

Visually, I think the tempo marking is a bit close to the segno. The dynamics in 38/54 and the rit. in 80 could be nudged left a bit.

These should be fixed I think now.

One general thing I can comment on is about notating when which hand takes the middle voice. Up to m32 it's pretty clear, but after that the "L.H." markings get a bit rarer, which sometimes makes it unclear at first glance when the L.H. needs to take over the middle line. For example, in m32 it's clearly notated that the L.H. plays the middle voice, and in 33 it's clear that it should (mostly) go back to the R.H., but at 34 it's in the R.H. staff while the L.H. needs to play it. In that case, something like this should look a bit clearer:
You cannot view this attachment.
Of course, the player can make most of these decisions themselves too, but it just saves them some time and effort to figure out where these places are and what notes should be moved to the L.H.

I made the arrangement a while ago now, but I think I tried to be pretty consistent with my markings (or at least internally consistent).  My general aim with this was that I'd put some markings to begin with and then those markings would disappear as I expected the pianist to get the idea of what was going on.  Actually writing all of them in would be a bit of a pain and probably overly prescriptive when there are quite a few places where multiple approaches will work.  The only time I use cross-staffing in the sheet is if the middle voice splits between hands (correct me if I'm wrong on that anywhere) but otherwise I just keep the middle voice in the upper staff for visual consistency.  To take your example, in 32/33 the markings help with the confusion because all three parts have to be played on beat 1, whereas it is easier to follow in 34+ as the only two parts are playing so it's clear the left hand is meant to take the middle voice as the bass note is just holding the A.  I think similar rationale should apply to the other places in the sheet.

-m31: Nothing wrong here, but maybe it's slightly more comfortable to put the C on beat 2 in the L.H. as well?

Similarly, here the left hand is forced to take the B on beat 1 but the C can be taken by either hand, so I didn't make any prescriptions about it.

-m54 and 75-77: Dots from dotted notes shouldn't be separated from their notes with other notes (as it currently looks like it applies to the quarter notes), so either of these ways to notate it may look better:

I think I've fixed these now, along with bar 30, 58 and 74.


Thanks for checking both of you, new files are up.

[Bloop]

I made the arrangement a while ago now, but I think I tried to be pretty consistent with my markings (or at least internally consistent).  My general aim with this was that I'd put some markings to begin with and then those markings would disappear as I expected the pianist to get the idea of what was going on.  Actually writing all of them in would be a bit of a pain and probably overly prescriptive when there are quite a few places where multiple approaches will work.  The only time I use cross-staffing in the sheet is if the middle voice splits between hands (correct me if I'm wrong on that anywhere) but otherwise I just keep the middle voice in the upper staff for visual consistency.  To take your example, in 32/33 the markings help with the confusion because all three parts have to be played on beat 1, whereas it is easier to follow in 34+ as the only two parts are playing so it's clear the left hand is meant to take the middle voice as the bass note is just holding the A.  I think similar rationale should apply to the other places in the sheet.

Ah I see, it pretty much came down to choosing whether you want the pianist to figure out those places for themselves or not. In that case, leaving it as is is fine! It could be that I'm too focused on figuring everything out for the player already :p

Everything else looks good too, so I'll accept! (leaving the topic up for a bit so Latios can respond to his part as well)
You cannot view this attachment.

[Latios212]

Since Bloop didn't have any concerns I suppose this is OK.  I did have another look at the specific place you mentioned (30-35) and I can follow what I was going for, although the notes aren't in the correct octave (so that they can sit above the ostinato).  Let me know if you have any other concerns regarding this.

Nope, no further concerns! Thanks for double checking it.

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Bloop.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot