[WiiU] Tokyo Mirage Sessions ♯FE - "SESSION!!! (Normal Battle)" by Latios212

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Megami Tensei/Persona
Game: Tokyo Mirage Sessions ♯FE
Console: Wii U
Title: SESSION!!! (Normal Battle)
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Latios212

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Latios212]

Title from here, although I'd be happy to add "(Battle Theme)" or something to the sheet title to make it a bit more apparent to someone who happens to be browsing. This is the main battle theme that plays when battling normal enemies.

Also I wasn't super happy with the left hand in m. 77-92, but after revisiting it a few times I didn't have any better ideas for this section. Feel free to suggest I think everything else here went rather well, surprisingly given the style of the original track.

[Kricketune54]

Formatting
I was going to say more about the dynamics being kind of forward, but if it was done to be consistent throughout due to page 1 it makes sense to do it. I know page 1 is a bit scrunched to try and keep the uniform format of the pages after lol.

As far as title goes, would it make sense to put (Normal Battle) if that is what the YouTube video is titled?
   Funnily the vgmdb credits (must be a spacing error on their part) have a space between the SESSION and the !!!


Notes
- m9-12 and m93 to 100 these LH notes are technically an octave higher than other 8va LH sections. Could remove 8va in these places, though maybe that makes m13 too tough to pull off.
- m16, m24 RH beat 4 I think this note is held for about an 8th length, so put a staccatto on it. I wasn't able to hear if there was a pitch on beat 4.5 that wasn't the LH.
- m29 beat 2.5 and similar - thought about recommending grace notes but it didn't sound good
- m66 RH and similar I do not hear a movement between beat 1.0 and 1.5, sounds like it's just a half note

The 16th note pairs that split between the staffs are not all 16ths. Here is how I hear them:
- m46 the 16th note figure I actually hear this as 6 pitches: A-G-C-A-C-G. The first A is also a longer pitch... I think as far as lengths A is a dotted 8th note, and everything up to the G at the end is a 16th. The G itself I think can be written as a dotted 8th.
- m50 A-G-C-A-C-F-C. First A is a dotted 8th, and rest are 16ths.
- m54 is good
- m58 did you try putting the first 16th note (E) up an octave? I don't think it's that much more difficult and would more accurately represent the pitch movements (E is going down to a G)

- m60 LH it sounds like the first A is a quarter note followed by an 8th rest before the A's on beat 3.
- m80 and m88 LH beat 4.5 sounds like an 8th note A but probably good to omit so LH can move back down


Overall not too much to say, pretty tight arrangement of something that must've taken quite a bit to put together

[Kricketune54]

Le Bump

[Latios212]

Sorry for the wait, will try not to let that happen again on my sheets thank you for the review!

I was going to say more about the dynamics being kind of forward, but if it was done to be consistent throughout due to page 1 it makes sense to do it. I know page 1 is a bit scrunched to try and keep the uniform format of the pages after lol.

What do you mean by forward? I'm not sure I understand what you meant here unfortunately

Title from here, although I'd be happy to add "(Battle Theme)" or something to the sheet title to make it a bit more apparent to someone who happens to be browsing. This is the main battle theme that plays when battling normal enemies.

Formatting
As far as title goes, would it make sense to put (Normal Battle) if that is what the YouTube video is titled?
   Funnily the vgmdb credits (must be a spacing error on their part) have a space between the SESSION and the !!!

Sure, sounds good to me!

- m9-12 and m93 to 100 these LH notes are technically an octave higher than other 8va LH sections. Could remove 8va in these places, though maybe that makes m13 too tough to pull off.

Maybe, but they sound a bit too light for my preference since this piece has a very bassy sound throughout. I'd also prefer to keep it as is for consistency keeping it at the same level as the rest of the LH part.

- m16, m24 RH beat 4 I think this note is held for about an 8th length, so put a staccatto on it. I wasn't able to hear if there was a pitch on beat 4.5 that wasn't the LH.

Staccato works for me! I hear an A on beat 4.5 but it doesn't feel quite right to write it in as part of the melody.

- m29 beat 2.5 and similar - thought about recommending grace notes but it didn't sound good

Yeah, I don't think grace notes sound quite right on piano here.

- m66 RH and similar I do not hear a movement between beat 1.0 and 1.5, sounds like it's just a half note

Ah good catch. It's a bit hard to tell because the piece still pulses the 3/3/3/3/2/2 rhythm but I agree it's not as apparent in the melody. I've changed 66 and 74 to match 62 and 70!

The 16th note pairs that split between the staffs are not all 16ths. Here is how I hear them:
- m46 the 16th note figure I actually hear this as 6 pitches: A-G-C-A-C-G. The first A is also a longer pitch... I think as far as lengths A is a dotted 8th note, and everything up to the G at the end is a 16th. The G itself I think can be written as a dotted 8th.
- m50 A-G-C-A-C-F-C. First A is a dotted 8th, and rest are 16ths.
- m54 is good
- m58 did you try putting the first 16th note (E) up an octave? I don't think it's that much more difficult and would more accurately represent the pitch movements (E is going down to a G)

Sorry I'm not really hearing these differences at all; I listened again and still hear what I wrote in (just up an octave or two in the original). I'm also not sure what you mean by the first couple of points here, would you mind sketching out what you mean?

- m60 LH it sounds like the first A is a quarter note followed by an 8th rest before the A's on beat 3.

Hmm, I still hear all eight quarter A's clearly.

- m80 and m88 LH beat 4.5 sounds like an 8th note A but probably good to omit so LH can move back down

Perhaps, similar to the LH in the earlier section (12+) but yeah it'd make sense to omit anyway for playability..

Overall not too much to say, pretty tight arrangement of something that must've taken quite a bit to put together

Thank you! It's been a while but yeah it's quite a piece haha. Files updated!

[Kricketune54]

What do you mean by forward? I'm not sure I understand what you meant here unfortunately

Hmm. I think because the dynamics are a bit to the left of center of the notes? This wasn't a necessary comment me of 6 months ago...

Maybe, but they sound a bit too light for my preference since this piece has a very bassy sound throughout. I'd also prefer to keep it as is for consistency keeping it at the same level as the rest of the LH part.

Yeah that's fine!

Sorry I'm not really hearing these differences at all; I listened again and still hear what I wrote in (just up an octave or two in the original). I'm also not sure what you mean by the first couple of points here, would you mind sketching out what you mean?

Reviewed this quote block, I don't agree with myself and hear what you've got!

Hmm, I still hear all eight quarter A's clearly.

Yeah I'm hearing that as well

Thank you! It's been a while but yeah it's quite a piece haha. Files updated!

It's certainly been some time, but I've got nothing else to add here, approved

[Libera]

I actually have surprisingly little for how long the piece is.  It all looks pretty good to me in general.

-I hear the last four sixteenths in bar 58 as E -> D -> C -> G (with the last interval going up rather than down).
-Cresc. starting in 73?
-I hear the bass going up at the end of 84/92, but I also see the value in what you wrote in.

Also I wasn't super happy with the left hand in m. 77-92, but after revisiting it a few times I didn't have any better ideas for this section. Feel free to suggest I think everything else here went rather well, surprisingly given the style of the original track.

Yeah, somehow the arrangement of the original here doesn't lend itself to piano that well.  I don't have any amazing ideas.  Maybe you could try to emphasise the percussion more and only move to the bass for the interesting bits?  But then it's not really clear what notes you should pick for the percussion notes....

I go back to my original statement of not having any amazing ideas.  What is there currently isn't awful, but I agree it doesn't feel amazing compared to the rest of the sheet.  Sorry not to be more useful.

[Latios212]

-I hear the last four sixteenths in bar 58 as E -> D -> C -> G (with the last interval going up rather than down).
-I hear the bass going up at the end of 84/92, but I also see the value in what you wrote in.

Hmm I still hear both of these as I wrote them. I checked after transposing by
- an octave down in m. 58, noting that is two octaves higher in the original
- an octave up in m. 84/92
and still ended up with what I have.

-Cresc. starting in 73?

Ah yeah that sounds good! Added one in.

Yeah, somehow the arrangement of the original here doesn't lend itself to piano that well.  I don't have any amazing ideas.  Maybe you could try to emphasise the percussion more and only move to the bass for the interesting bits?  But then it's not really clear what notes you should pick for the percussion notes....

I go back to my original statement of not having any amazing ideas.  What is there currently isn't awful, but I agree it doesn't feel amazing compared to the rest of the sheet.  Sorry not to be more useful.

No worries, thanks for thinking it over! I still don't really have any ideas on how to improve it, so I guess it shall stay as is for now.

I actually have surprisingly little for how long the piece is.  It all looks pretty good to me in general.

Thanks for going over it! It's not an easy piece...

[Libera]

Yeah OK if I transpose it up its a lot clearer.  Although that last interval still sounds like it's going up in 58 at the actual pitch and only sounds like its going down to me lowered.

Anyway, I'll accept.

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Libera.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot