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

[Zeta]

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

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Libera]

[Kricketune54]

-m38-39 RH I do not hear F# and G# under the C#.  These stuck out to me, but I also realize that the prior measure (37) includes an F# under the A I also don't hear.  Is this just a case of logically filling out some chords?
-What's the reasoning behind not doing tremolos for 70, 74-75, or at least tying 74-75 together?  I'm not really hearing the D# or F#, but am hearing a Bn for 74-75

[Libera]

-m38-39 RH I do not hear F# and G# under the C#.  These stuck out to me, but I also realize that the prior measure (37) includes an F# under the A I also don't hear.  Is this just a case of logically filling out some chords?

Hmm no I don't really do that in my arrangements.  I can hear these notes in the original.  The G# is an octave lower but it fits in nicely here.

-What's the reasoning behind not doing tremolos for 70, 74-75, or at least tying 74-75 together?  I'm not really hearing the D# or F#, but am hearing a Bn for 74-75

The tremolos don't sound very good at all with this light texture, so I just ignored them.  I think you get a pretty good space-y sound with the pedal here anyway.  The D# and F# are definitely there, that's where the dissonant sound comes from in this string part, particularly the minor 2nd between the D# and the E, but I can add in the B as well.


Thanks for having a look.  Files updated.

[Static]

Wow there's a lot going on here... I think your arrangement captures a lot of the details in the original though, sounds really good.

• For the first section, maybe use a 6/8(3/4) time signature? I guess it's fine without it too.
• m7/11 RH sound a bit empty to me without the En there.
• m21 RH: The first note should be A#.
• m22: Is there a reason why the crescendo is hidden? Couldn't hurt to leave it in since it does crescendo there in the original.
• m32 is missing an arpeggio marking.
• m41/45 RH: I think I'm hearing this rhythm in the melody:
  
• m53/55/etc. LH beat 5: I'm hearing this as four 16th notes, D-B-A-B. I don't hear an F#.
• m74-75 RH: The lowest note I hear as B instead of D#.
• Some of your tempo markings (m40, 60) have extra space after the note compared to the other ones (m30, 52).

[Libera]

For the first section, maybe use a 6/8(3/4) time signature? I guess it's fine without it too.

I think comparing this to RETURN I feel like the mixed time signature is less needed here.  It only really does it for six bars and those have 6/8 bars mixed in as well so I think you can pretty much the whole thing as 6/8 with those bars syncopated.  At least that's sort of my rationale here.

m7/11 RH sound a bit empty to me without the En there.

Yeah I can add that in.  I also adjusted a couple of extra harmony notes as well for consistency with that change (nothing major).

m22: Is there a reason why the crescendo is hidden? Couldn't hurt to leave it in since it does crescendo there in the original.

None at all.  It's just a mistake.  Fixed!

m32 is missing an arpeggio marking.

Fixed!

Some of your tempo markings (m40, 60) have extra space after the note compared to the other ones (m30, 52).

Whoops.  Thanks for spotting that!

m21 RH: The first note should be A#.

Not so sure about that one.  It sounds like a G# to me, as I have it.

m41/45 RH: I think I'm hearing this rhythm in the melody:

I can sort of hear that in 41, but not really in 45.  I think this (the current) way the melody matches up with in the opening, so it makes the most sense to me like this.

m53/55/etc. LH beat 5: I'm hearing this as four 16th notes, D-B-A-B. I don't hear an F#.

Yeah this is really quite tricky to hear properly I think.  I agree on listening again that there is no F#, but it still sounds like triplets to me, or maybe even a B quarter triplet followed by an An eighth triplet.  I think on some of the later instances it sounds a little clearer and it sounds like it starts on a Dn, so I've currently changed them to Dn -> Bn -> An triplets for the time being.  But I'm happy to discuss it more.

m74-75 RH: The lowest note I hear as B instead of D#.

That's what it currently is.  If you meant the other way around, then I still definitely hear the Bn at the bottom.

Wow there's a lot going on here... I think your arrangement captures a lot of the details in the original though, sounds really good.

Thanks!  And yeah this one is quite dense, so thanks for going through carefully!  Files updated.

[Static]

Not so sure about that one.  It sounds like a G# to me, as I have it.

Still sounds like A# to me, I have it slowed down a little in this clip.

I can sort of hear that in 41, but not really in 45.  I think this (the current) way the melody matches up with in the opening, so it makes the most sense to me like this.

Similarly, I still really clearly hear the extra notes in m41 (take a listen to this clip lowered an octave; the articulations are clearer). In m41, the violin plays the part, and then in m45 the flute plays it while the violin holds B.
Even in the original octave, I still hear this part well. It's easy for the notes to get lost in the thick texture, but I think the melody was deliberately varied for this section.

Yeah this is really quite tricky to hear properly I think.  I agree on listening again that there is no F#, but it still sounds like triplets to me, or maybe even a B quarter triplet followed by an An eighth triplet.  I think on some of the later instances it sounds a little clearer and it sounds like it starts on a Dn, so I've currently changed them to Dn -> Bn -> An triplets for the time being.  But I'm happy to discuss it more.

Not sure I hear it as a triplet still (although I'm having a hard time picking out any rhythm here), but the pitches sound correct to me now. I think it's fine as you have it.

That's what it currently is.  If you meant the other way around, then I still definitely hear the Bn at the bottom.

Oh, I was messing around with those trying to figure out the chord so I think I accidentally deleted one. However, I don't think I'm hearing a D# in those chords, I think it's just B-E-F#-G#.

Everything else looks good

[Libera]

Still sounds like A# to me, I have it slowed down a little in this clip.

Really not hearing this, sorry.

Similarly, I still really clearly hear the extra notes in m41 (take a listen to this clip lowered an octave; the articulations are clearer). In m41, the violin plays the part, and then in m45 the flute plays it while the violin holds B.
Even in the original octave, I still hear this part well. It's easy for the notes to get lost in the thick texture, but I think the melody was deliberately varied for this section.

I still don't know about this.  I can just about hear something like it in 41 but it's not clear to me whether it's actually meant to be part of the melody.  In bar 45, I can't hear this at all.  For consistency, I haven't changed anything yet.

Oh, I was messing around with those trying to figure out the chord so I think I accidentally deleted one. However, I don't think I'm hearing a D# in those chords, I think it's just B-E-F#-G#.

It definitely sounds wrong to me without the D#.  The En/D# dissonance is pretty clear to me here.

The files are still the same as before, although I've updated the musx because for some reason it was still the old one.

[Static]

I'll approve then, looks good and I have no other issues. I'd like someone else to take a listen to m21 and 41 though

[Latios212]

Nice job on this one! Each of the Fates map themes is something of a beast to finish...

I'd like someone else to take a listen to m21 and 41 though

I pretty clearly hear the first note in m. 21 as an A#. For the other part, similar to Libera I can hear the figure in 41 and less so in 45. All the same it feels a bit weird to me to articulate as part of the melody so I'd be okay leaving it out.

For the first section, maybe use a 6/8(3/4) time signature? I guess it's fine without it too.

I think comparing this to RETURN I feel like the mixed time signature is less needed here.  It only really does it for six bars and those have 6/8 bars mixed in as well so I think you can pretty much the whole thing as 6/8 with those bars syncopated.  At least that's sort of my rationale here.

I think m. 13-20 are pretty readable overall, but how about beaming the eighth notes together in m. 13 and 17 to fit the 3/4 rhythm implied by the left hand?

Other stuff for the first couple of pages:
- Pretty subtle but I think m. 34-35 are seventh chords - that is to say I think the lower notes in the right hand should be E F# G# instead of mirroring the bass
- The triplet bracket in m. 39 should angle up instead of down

It's getting a little late here so I'll come back to check pages 3-5 sometime in the next couple days.

[Latios212]

And the rest!

- Missing space after the = in the tempo equivalence markings
- You could lower the 16th rest in m. 68 to normal staff height
- End of the 8va in m. 75 should be over the chords instead of the whole measure
- Ties on the RH chords in m. 78-79 could use a bit of TLC
- It might be a little nicer to raise the RH rests in m. 78-79 - so the top layer ones are above the staff like the chords and the lower layer ones are at normal staff height like the previous measures.
- I don't hear the left hand part at all in m. 80?
- For the left hand part in m. 76/78, my initial reaction is that I feel like the last octave (B) should be an octave up. Playing with it more it sounds like there's a both a lower B and a higher B in the original, so I see where you're coming from. Regardless, though, when listening to the original I personally feel like it should go up similar to how m. 77/79 ascend to the An octave.

[Libera]

I pretty clearly hear the first note in m. 21 as an A#. For the other part, similar to Libera I can hear the figure in 41 and less so in 45. All the same it feels a bit weird to me to articulate as part of the melody so I'd be okay leaving it out.

I still don't hear this but since you all disagree I'll change it.

I think m. 13-20 are pretty readable overall, but how about beaming the eighth notes together in m. 13 and 17 to fit the 3/4 rhythm implied by the left hand?

Other stuff for the first couple of pages:
- Pretty subtle but I think m. 34-35 are seventh chords - that is to say I think the lower notes in the right hand should be E F# G# instead of mirroring the bass
- The triplet bracket in m. 39 should angle up instead of down

All should be fixed.

- Missing space after the = in the tempo equivalence markings
- You could lower the 16th rest in m. 68 to normal staff height
- End of the 8va in m. 75 should be over the chords instead of the whole measure
- Ties on the RH chords in m. 78-79 could use a bit of TLC
- It might be a little nicer to raise the RH rests in m. 78-79 - so the top layer ones are above the staff like the chords and the lower layer ones are at normal staff height like the previous measures.
- I don't hear the left hand part at all in m. 80?

All should be fixed.

- For the left hand part in m. 76/78, my initial reaction is that I feel like the last octave (B) should be an octave up. Playing with it more it sounds like there's a both a lower B and a higher B in the original, so I see where you're coming from. Regardless, though, when listening to the original I personally feel like it should go up similar to how m. 77/79 ascend to the An octave.

I still feel like the extra low bass note for the B is more important than the higher one, so I've left it as is.  I can see why you might do the other one though.


Files updated.  Thanks for checking.

[Latios212]

I still feel like the extra low bass note for the B is more important than the higher one, so I've left it as is.  I can see why you might do the other one though.

Yeah I can see why you'd want this one

Everything else looks good so I'll accept now!

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Latios212.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot