[NES] Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse - "Aquarius" by Atcero

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Castlevania
Game: Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse
Console: Nintendo Entertainment System
Title: Aquarius
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Atcero

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Atcero]

I went to replace a song and instead just arranged the original as well, whoops

[XiaoMigros]

cheap megalovania ripoff smh

Rhythmic notation:

• In m5 and similar, you should show beat 3.
• In m8 and similar, you should show beat 2.
• In general, beaming over 16th rests would make this sheet more legible, do you want to include that?

Page formatting:

• Page 1 has a fair amount of space at the bottom of the page, while the height of the tempo marking hits the composer/arranger text. I would recommend moving everything down a bit, and maybe spacing out systems more if needed.
• Page 2 also has some space at the bottom, but it doesn't really stand out too much so I would say adjusting it is optional.
• The D.C. text would best be moved upwards a bit

Notes:

• All eighth notes in the LH from m5 onwards sound staccato to me, with the notable exception of the Ebs in m16&20. I know you aren't particularly fond of articulation but it's quite distinctly staccato here.
  On that note (pun maybe intended??), the 16th notes that are followed by 16th rests from m5 onwards can be simplified to staccato 8ths as well.
• In the right hand as well I think not all notes are held for the duration written in the sheet. Up until m13, the only thing I would change is making the dotted 8th note from m8 and similar a regular 8th note followed by a 16th rest. (Beats 4 and 4.5 of m7 and similar can also be written as staccato 8ths, btw)
• After m13, it gets a little more complicated. Except for m15&19, which sound legato, the top layer sounds like something in between full and half duration. However, I think opting for full duration makes more sense here, not only will it provide a stronger contrast to the more staccato-ish section preceding it, but in practice sustaining it won't be entirely audible thanks to movement in other layers.
  There are two things I would nonetheless consider changing, which are
  1) Write b1.25 of m13 and similar as an 8th instead of a 16th note and
  2) Shorten the duration of the notes in m16&20, as the melody's duration isn't obscured by a lower layer here
• You simplified one of the square parts in the second half of m5 and similar. What you have works well, but it loses some energy from the original. One (entirely optional) idea I had would be to include this part in full in its original octave in the LH, instead of the bass. Entirely up to you though, how it is rn is fine too

[Atcero]

Thank ya! Got all of that updated minus:

1) Write b1.25 of m13 and similar as an 8th instead of a 16th note and
2) Shorten the duration of the notes in m16&20, as the melody's duration isn't obscured by a lower layer here

I think it is fine as is for both, as that is the original song for me reads more as how I have it written for that.

Similarly, I am keeping out the 16th run for m5 and the like as I decided that could get tricky to play, and I may take out the run I kept in for m14 and the like as well for similar reasoning.

And personally, I truly hate beaming over 16th rests unless finale makes me. Personally, I think it makes a sheet harder to read as a piano player but that could have been just how I was taught.

With that, please do not assume that I do not like doing something for arranging unless I have made it explicitly clear. I simply didn't think of the staccatos, not that I am not fond of having them. That goes for most articulations that reflect the original song the best, which I have definitely made use of in previous sheets.

[XiaoMigros]

1) Write b1.25 of m13 and similar as an 8th instead of a 16th note and
2) Shorten the duration of the notes in m16&20, as the melody's duration isn't obscured by a lower layer here[/li][/list]

I think it is fine as is for both, as that is the original song for me reads more as how I have it written for that.

Similarly, I am keeping out the 16th run for m5 and the like as I decided that could get tricky to play, and I may take out the run I kept in for m14 and the like as well for similar reasoning.

Gotcha, sounds good

And personally, I truly hate beaming over 16th rests unless finale makes me. Personally, I think it makes a sheet harder to read as a piano player but that could have been just how I was taught.

Understandable, I only bring this up because most, if not all, sheets on site I've seen do this. I'll see what the updaters have to say on this.

With that, please do not assume that I do not like doing something for arranging unless I have made it explicitly clear. I simply didn't think of the staccatos, not that I am not fond of having them. That goes for most articulations that reflect the original song the best, which I have definitely made use of in previous sheets.

Sorry, I didn't mean this in a condescending way. I simply based my assumption off the impression I got. Thanks for clearing that up, won't happen again.

[Static]

• Key should be D minor. It's aeolian/natural and harmonic minor for the most part, so no need for modal key signatures if that's what you were thinking.
• There are a lot of spots where you have a 16th note on an 8th note beat, like m5 LH beat 2.5/4.5 or m7 RH beat 4-4.5. These would be more cleanly written as just staccato 8th notes, like m5 LH beat 2/4 or m7 LH beat 4-4.5.
• 16ths should be beamed across the beat. You do this already in m5-6 RH, but there are several other spots that should also be beamed.
• m12: Maybe put a crescendo here?
• In m13-19 RH, there are several spots where the lower RH layer is infeasible/impractical to play at this tempo, like m14 beat 2 with parallel 9ths. I would suggest either adjusting the lower layer to have different notes that follow the same harmony, or just removing notes in spots like that.
• m13/17 LH should be spelled as Abs, not G#s.
• m13-15, 19 LH beat 1 should be staccato, like m17-18.

[Atcero]

Got that all updated, thank you!

[Static]

• m7/12 RH beat 4-4.5 would be more cleanly written as just staccato 8th notes
• 16ths should be beamed across the beat. You do this already in m5-6 RH, but there are several other spots that should also be beamed.
• m13/17 LH should be spelled as Abs, not G#s.
• m19 LH beat 1 should be staccato

These things all look unchanged

Rest of the changes look good though

[Atcero]

Got this all updated finally, sorry on the wait. Thank ya!

[Static]

All the changes look good except:

• m5-10 LH beat 4.5 still looks like a 16th note rather than a staccato 8th.
• m13-19 RH: I had mentioned removing some of the 2nd layer 16th notes because they were creating parallel minor 9ths (unfeasible to play at this tempo). You changed it in an earlier revision, I remember, but it's back to how it was before.

That's it!

[Atcero]

No idea how that got reverted and I hope I got what I had last time for my update to those measures. Thank ya! (should be faster again since schools in sesh and I got more free time)

[Static]

Sweet, looks great. I'll approve pending one last change: flip the top layer down on beats 2-4 of m13-14 and 17-18, since there's nothing underneath anymore.

[Maelstrom]

Few quick things:
-Did you ever change the key?
-In the final measure, the offbeat notes in b4 are all A, not B/C#

Otherwise it looks pretty solid, don't think I have more to add.

[Atcero]

Got that all updated, thank you!

[Atcero]

I did forget to implement Static's point so I did that and got them reuploaded