[SW] Xenoblade Chronicles 3 - "Title Screen" by XiaoMigros

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Xeno
Game: Xenoblade Chronicles 3
Console: Nintendo Switch
Title: Title Screen
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: XiaoMigros

[attachment deleted by admin]

[XiaoMigros]

I have a bunch more from this game done, but I haven't found any titles for them yet and I'd rather submit this, so here it is

Arrangement wise it's relatively straightforward, it will need a few minor touchups but nothing major (except for the run in m30 that I need Finale help with).

[Bloop]

-m1-7: There's a pretty clear melody in these 7 bars, but from just looking at the sheet it's not that easy to see how the melody moves between the hands. Maybe you could write the melody notes in separate layers, possibly connected with dotted lines.
-m3: I don't think I hear the low F here on beat 1, but I do hear a G an octave lower. You'll probably have to move the A to the R.H. then. I also don't hear the upper D in the L.H. on beat 3.
-m6: I hear a D in this chord too (between the Bb and F)
-m11-13: All single note grace notes here should be 8th notes instead of 16ths. 16ths are usually reserved for 2 or more notes.
-m19: I think I hear the L.H. C from beat 3.75 on just beat 4 instead.
-m30: I hear the G octave in the L.H. an octave lower, and I hear a D in the R.H. chord as well. I'll ping you on discord for the run ^^
-m42: I don't hear the grace note in this measure, I just hear the high A played just off the beat.
-m46: I don't hear the E in the R.H. here

[XiaoMigros]

-m1-7: There's a pretty clear melody in these 7 bars, but from just looking at the sheet it's not that easy to see how the melody moves between the hands. Maybe you could write the melody notes in separate layers, possibly connected with dotted lines.

I can't make out a consistent melodic line in this section, so I split the notes out as I would most comfortably play them. If you think it's important to write out the melody separately, I could try that, but I would need help identifying what exactly this melody would be.

-m3: I don't think I hear the low F here on beat 1, but I do hear a G an octave lower. You'll probably have to move the A to the R.H. then. I also don't hear the upper D in the L.H. on beat 3.

I think the F was a remnant from the prior measure that I mistakenly added, and the D an overtone of the lower D (as the A4 is also quite prominent). Fixed!

-m6: I hear a D in this chord too (between the Bb and F)

I checked and there's one there, added!

-m11-13: All single note grace notes here should be 8th notes instead of 16ths. 16ths are usually reserved for 2 or more notes.

The reason I made them 16ths is because they are the length of a 16th and I wanted that reflected. If I knew how to remove the strikethrough line on the single ones I would. With that in mind, do you still think I should change them? Or maybe write the section differently altogether?

-m19: I think I hear the L.H. C from beat 3.75 on just beat 4 instead.

I'm not sure what exactly I hear here, I think it could go either way, but to me it seems more likely the figure played between beats 3-4 is the same as on many prior occasions? What do you think?

-m30: I hear the G octave in the L.H. an octave lower, and I hear a D in the R.H. chord as well. I'll ping you on discord for the run ^^

Sounds good, I think I hear a C and D in the RH chord of b4 in the measure prior, though they may be overtones it would make sense for it to be playing consistent 4-note chords for that section. Changes to the run haven't been completed yet, as my cross-staffing still isn't working in Finale.

-m42: I don't hear the grace note in this measure, I just hear the high A played just off the beat.

I slowed it down and was still able to hear it, though it is a bit faint.

-m46: I don't hear the E in the R.H. here

Removed. Thanks for your time!

[Bloop]

I can't make out a consistent melodic line in this section, so I split the notes out as I would most comfortably play them. If you think it's important to write out the melody separately, I could try that, but I would need help identifying what exactly this melody would be.

I interpret the voice that's played loudest as the melody, which would be this:
You cannot view this attachment.
You could debate whether the low D in beat 3 of m3 is included in this melody or not, but I personally feel like it's a bit more towards the timbre of the accompaniment.

The reason I made them 16ths is because they are the length of a 16th and I wanted that reflected. If I knew how to remove the strikethrough line on the single ones I would. With that in mind, do you still think I should change them? Or maybe write the section differently altogether?

They're even a bit faster than 16ths, more towards triplet 16ths. The beam of a single grace note shouldn't reflect the speed though, since they serve more of an ornamental purpose than a strict rhythmic one. By removing the diagonal stroke it would be an appoggiatura, which is defined as being played on the beat instead of before. So personally, I'd still go for 8ths

I'm not sure what exactly I hear here, I think it could go either way, but to me it seems more likely the figure played between beats 3-4 is the same as on many prior occasions? What do you think?

Oh hm, now I totally hear it like you have it, lol. However, is there a specific reason you tied over this specific C instead of all the others?

I slowed it down and was still able to hear it, though it is a bit faint.

Oh wow, it's really faint, but I hear it now too.

Changes to the run haven't been completed yet, as my cross-staffing still isn't working in Finale.

Will this work?

[XiaoMigros]

I interpret the voice that's played loudest as the melody, which would be this:
You cannot view this attachment.
You could debate whether the low D in beat 3 of m3 is included in this melody or not, but I personally feel like it's a bit more towards the timbre of the accompaniment.

Do you think this melody worth showing? I would totally be with you if this track consisted of multiple instruments but as this is a piano solo I worry that writing this out separately would remove that pianistic touch from it, if that makes sense.

They're even a bit faster than 16ths, more towards triplet 16ths. The beam of a single grace note shouldn't reflect the speed though, since they serve more of an ornamental purpose than a strict rhythmic one. By removing the diagonal stroke it would be an appoggiatura, which is defined as being played on the beat instead of before. So personally, I'd still go for 8ths

That makes sense, fixed.

Oh hm, now I totally hear it like you have it, lol. However, is there a specific reason you tied over this specific C instead of all the others?

I think it makes more sense to explain the reason why I used rests elsewhere, namely to show that the 16th figure jumps to the RH on the beat. In this instance in m19 however, it sounded to me as if the RH has it's own moment of melody, so I tied over to show that the two hands are separate.

Will this work?

It did! I also added fermate on the rests in the succeeding measure.

[Bloop]

Do you think this melody worth showing? I would totally be with you if this track consisted of multiple instruments but as this is a piano solo I worry that writing this out separately would remove that pianistic touch from it, if that makes sense.

I think it would actually make the sheet a bit less pianistic, because showing the melody could help an experienced player try to balance the voices like the original (those being melody, bass, chords and countermelody). Purposefully hiding the melody behind the chords makes it look less cohesive imo. The melody also returns in m32, so showing it more clearly in m1 helps making that relation too.

[XiaoMigros]

Hmm, upon closer consideration I can see this working, though before I make such a major change to the sheet I would prefer to have another opinion on this, just to be sure.

[Bloop]

That makes sense! Then I'll approve so another updater can take a look ^^
You cannot view this attachment.

[Latios212]

Hmm, upon closer consideration I can see this working, though before I make such a major change to the sheet I would prefer to have another opinion on this, just to be sure.

Small disclaimer, I'm not super familiar with this piece yet (I typically just put my Switch on sleep instead of closing the software and coming back to the title screen... lol). I see how separating out the melody visually would be helpful in understanding the piece and where to emphasize. That said, I think the way it's written now is fine and I think I have a slight preference for keeping it as is - it makes the desired hand positionings easy to determine.

For m. 19 beat 4 LH:

I think it makes more sense to explain the reason why I used rests elsewhere, namely to show that the 16th figure jumps to the RH on the beat. In this instance in m19 however, it sounded to me as if the RH has it's own moment of melody, so I tied over to show that the two hands are separate.

I don't agree with this, partially because I don't think the 16th note line consistently jumps to the RH on the beat. It's a bit hard to tell since everything's solo piano but the notes you have notated in the right hand stand out to me as stuck more forcefully than the rest of the 16th notes in the left hand. But more than that, I think tying over a single note here is confusing to the performer since it implies a contrast with the rest of the section where you do have rests. I would highly recommend using a rest here, or tying notes to fill in all of the 16th rest gaps in this page (I think I'd personally do that, but what you have now is perfectly fine too since you indicated pedal usage).

Anyway, this is a great sheet! Very accurate and clean, I just have a handful of other rather small things to mention:
- We don't have an OST listing or breakdown of composers yet, do we? Or maybe some pieces of information from the composers on Twitter or something? I'm also hesitant to try researching as I haven't finished the game yet... my guess would be that Yasunori Mitsuda composed the piece and Mariam Abounassr might have arranged it, based on the style of the composition and credits for the piano title themes from 2 and Torna, but I don't know for sure.
- You have four systems on pages 2 and 3 and the gaps between the systems are quite large as a result. I'd highly recommend moving them closer together and allocating more room at the top and bottom of the page instead. Similar comment on page 1 as well.
- The tempo marking at the beginning would be better a bit more up and to the left
- The rhythm at the end of m. 1 and 32 I feel is much closer to a triplet and I think should be notated as such.
- The beat 1 LH G in m. 3 should be an octave lower.
- The tie going into m. 12 needs a bit of adjusting, it's at a really weird angle right now
- First RH chord in m. 18 should also have a C (right below the D)
- For m. 17/21 I would suggest putting the beat 2 16th run in the lower staff to maintain separation between the voices here. It's also straightforward enough for the left hand to continue playing the line there.
- You can widen the distance between LH/RH staves in m. 27-28 a bit to make more room for the crescendo.
- For dynamics, might I recommend an ff at m. 29? Also, the run starts out more subdued than the previous chords and it'd probably be good to notate a difference there as well.
- The RH chord in m. 35 is missing a Gn
- m. 43 last chord - I think I hear this inverted down once? (With C on top)
- m. 48 beat 1 should have a G on top of the RH chord just like in m. 50.
- The lone staccatos in m. 37 I think could be a little confusing to the performer in what is otherwise a very pedal-heavy legato piece. I think the implication here could be that the pedal is lifted for the staccato so that it could be played without reverb, and rest for the following beat where the rests are. I would suggest writing the lowest bass notes as sustained past the staccato note to imply that the chord is held. Something like this perhaps:
You cannot view this attachment.

[XiaoMigros]

That said, I think the way it's written now is fine and I think I have a slight preference for keeping it as is - it makes the desired hand positionings easy to determine.

I share this opinion, so I'll leave it as is (sorry Bloop).

For m. 19 beat 4 LH:I don't agree with this, partially because I don't think the 16th note line consistently jumps to the RH on the beat. It's a bit hard to tell since everything's solo piano but the notes you have notated in the right hand stand out to me as stuck more forcefully than the rest of the 16th notes in the left hand. But more than that, I think tying over a single note here is confusing to the performer since it implies a contrast with the rest of the section where you do have rests. I would highly recommend using a rest here, or tying notes to fill in all of the 16th rest gaps in this page (I think I'd personally do that, but what you have now is perfectly fine too since you indicated pedal usage).

I've added tied notes, which should also save confusion on whether to lift the pedal before each rest or not.

- We don't have an OST listing or breakdown of composers yet, do we? Or maybe some pieces of information from the composers on Twitter or something? I'm also hesitant to try researching as I haven't finished the game yet... my guess would be that Yasunori Mitsuda composed the piece and Mariam Abounassr might have arranged it, based on the style of the composition and credits for the piano title themes from 2 and Torna, but I don't know for sure.

I haven't found anything so far, so I think it's best to leave it as is for now. Once there's more information, official or not, this can of course be changed.

- For dynamics, might I recommend an ff at m. 29? Also, the run starts out more subdued than the previous chords and it'd probably be good to notate a difference there as well.

I'm not sure how to notate that difference nicely, a crescendo above the run would work but that would require more dynamic markings.. any ideas?

- The lone staccatos in m. 37 I think could be a little confusing to the performer in what is otherwise a very pedal-heavy legato piece. I think the implication here could be that the pedal is lifted for the staccato so that it could be played without reverb, and rest for the following beat where the rests are. I would suggest writing the lowest bass notes as sustained past the staccato note to imply that the chord is held. Something like this perhaps:
You cannot view this attachment.

That is what I wanted played here, though I don't really have a strong preference. Those Bbs seem to be released yet have some reverb to them, and I figured making them staccato was the best way to reflect that, regardless how the performer ends up using the pedal.

Thanks for your time! Please let me know if I missed anything..

[Latios212]

For m. 30:

I'm not sure how to notate that difference nicely, a crescendo above the run would work but that would require more dynamic markings.. any ideas?

I think something small and simple like this could work, below the staff since the run starts in the left hand:
You cannot view this attachment.

For m. 37-38:

That is what I wanted played here, though I don't really have a strong preference. Those Bbs seem to be released yet have some reverb to them, and I figured making them staccato was the best way to reflect that, regardless how the performer ends up using the pedal.

Alrighty, if you think it's fine as is~

Aside from that, I think everything looks good! Just a couple of roll markings need adjusting - m. 3 make sure to extend it downwards to the bass note, and m. 48 move it right away from the clef a little bit.

[XiaoMigros]

Done!

[Latios212]

Awesome!

Sorry, last couple of small things just looking at the PDF. The beginning of m. 20 needs to be fixed to accommodate the roll marking, and the measure spacing for m. 21-22 is a little lopsided (m. 21 is squished relative to m. 22) - just clicking on both using the simple entry tool should fix it.

[XiaoMigros]

No problem! Should be good now, and let me know if you spot anything else