[PS2] SoulCalibur III - "Forsaken Sanctuary" (Replacement) by Libera

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: SoulCalibur III
Console: PlayStation 2
Title: Forsaken Sanctuary
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Libera


Replacement Information:
Links to Existing Sheet: MUS | MIDI | PDF
Replacement Type: Challenge (new arranger)

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Libera]

[Replacement Initiative]

The audio we shared for the initiative cuts out around bar 75 and it's easy to think that the piece loops back to the beginning at bar 59, which the sheet on-site does.  In spite of that, the piece continues for an extra 31 bars before actually looping.

[Bloop]

Looks pretty solid! Just a few tiny or general things:

-Game name should be stylized as SoulCalibur III to fit the site name.
-I see you have added hidden pedal marks throughout the sheet, but it isn't that clear you were intending to use pedal until m21. Maybe you could add a con pedale mark at the start?
-Personally I don't think you really need the 8vas for the organ runs like in m1-3 throughout the sheet, as there aren't that many ledger lines yet. It doesn't matter too much though ^^
-m22 and 24: The second layer is a little bit offset to the right (which is more noticeable in the pdf)
-m37-40: I don't hear the trumpet hits on beats 2.75 in these measures. Same in m51-52 in the strings.

[Libera]

Everything should be fixed, apart from:

-Personally I don't think you really need the 8vas for the organ runs like in m1-3 throughout the sheet, as there aren't that many ledger lines yet. It doesn't matter too much though ^^

I thought about this when I was doing it, and the second layer's presence causes the runs to look kind of unwieldy in a lot of places without the 8va.  The one place that I think would be fine is 41-43, but then I thought it was better to be consistent across all of the instances.  Because 53-54 is two spaces lower, the 8va begins to look very silly with the second layer so I didn't use one there.

-m22 and 24: The second layer is a little bit offset to the right (which is more noticeable in the pdf)

Yeah these are a bit of a nightmare.  They appear differently depending on how zoomed in you are in finale and I can't quite get it to match up perfectly on the pdf.  I think if you printed it out the small differences wouldn't be noticeable anyway.  Regardless, I tried to fix it as best I could.


Thanks for checking!

[Bloop]

I thought about this when I was doing it, and the second layer's presence causes the runs to look kind of unwieldy in a lot of places without the 8va.  The one place that I think would be fine is 41-43, but then I thought it was better to be consistent across all of the instances.  Because 53-54 is two spaces lower, the 8va begins to look very silly with the second layer so I didn't use one there.

Ah I see yeah, the beams will be pretty far out of the bar then.
In that case, I'll approve!
You cannot view this attachment.

[Static]

Looks great! A few arrangement-related comments:

• m41: Maybe a fp would be better here instead of sub. p. The original sounds more like this with the crash symbol there. It's a really small difference though so I don't mind either way.
• m54 LH: I think the glissando (from the piano part) would sound better here than the tremolo, but it's fine without it too.
• m67-74 RH: There's a bit of extra harmony here that might be nice to include with the longer notes (also happens in 13-20 but would probably be better to save until here).
• m75-90 LH: Have you considered using tremolos and/or accented notes to incorporate that low brass part? Sounds fine as you have it written, but it might be worth experimenting with.

[Libera]

• m41: Maybe a fp would be better here instead of sub. p. The original sounds more like this with the crash symbol there. It's a really small difference though so I don't mind either way.

I think either could work, but I think with the fp and pedal you run the risk of the bleeding the loud starting chord across the whole bar and diminishing the effect of the sudden dynamic change.  It's probably possible to make work, but I think this gives the clearer direction and has the least chance of going wrong.

• m54 LH: I think the glissando (from the piano part) would sound better here than the tremolo, but it's fine without it too.

I don't really like glissandos all that much personally so I'd prefer to stick with the tremolo.  I think it has a much more neutral sound to it.

• m67-74 RH: There's a bit of extra harmony here that might be nice to include with the longer notes (also happens in 13-20 but would probably be better to save until here).

I played around a lot with this extra harmony when I arranged the piece (first in 13-20) and I didn't find anything that I thought sounded better than just leaving it as the single melody line.  If you've got any specific suggestions I'd be happy to look at them, but I don't have anything myself that I would prefer.

• m75-90 LH: Have you considered using tremolos and/or accented notes to incorporate that low brass part? Sounds fine as you have it written, but it might be worth experimenting with.

I like the idea of the accents.  Added!

Thanks for checking!

[Static]

Looks good then, accepted

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Static.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot