[DELETED] [ARCADE] Tekken Tag Tournament 2 - "Sadistic Xmas (Arctic Dream)" by Fantastic Ike

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: Tekken Tag Tournament 2
Console: Arcade
Title: Sadistic Xmas (Arctic Dream)
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Fantastic Ike

[Fantastic Ike]

Probably won't be finished in time for Christmas, but I don't wanna wait another year to submit lol

I'm aware I gotta add the courtesy key change at the end, but it's some weird trick that I forget how to do.

[Kricketune54]

There's some stuff here that could be made a lot easier and clearer in this arrangement, as well as some more representative chords and notes

Formatting
- I think Namco Bandai Games as the credit is fine rather than all caps
- when showing key changes, make sure to put a double bar line like this:

Spoiler

[close]

- m15 the forte here could be lowered a little to center

I didn't focus too much on formatting this go through because I think there's a lot that is subject to change.

Notes

The following feedback is for the intro section, but most of it also applies to m49-58 as well.

- m1 These seem like good pitch choices for this run. I think the dynamic should be Forte for m2 at least, maybe a cresc. from m1.
- m3 and elsewhere beat 4 the LH doesn't exactly have a part that makes this rhythm. I suppose it's fine but could also just have a quarter rest for the LH here.
- m3 and elsewhere also for this measure, put the E up an octave because the low drum notes are the A's rather than E's, so the A's should be on the bottom

Spoiler

[close]

- m10 this measure could use a better distribution of the chords present. I think instead of an An in the LH, there is a Bn that is also present in the original. The LH might also round this out better as B-E-B as opposed to E-B-E

Spoiler

[close]

- m11-m14 RH  each of the eight notes should be a staccato quarter note e.g. dotted quarter note



- m15, m19, and similar RH (going to refer to this as the "Celebration" line)- each of the eight notes should be a dotted quarter.
- m11-38 now this LH part actually isn't 2 16ths and an eighth, but rather two eights (same octave pattern though). This will be significantly easier than what is currently present, take some playing around with the formatting as well because find you have more space per measure system after this change
   - on the subject of this progression - the G# should actually be a Gn.
- m16 RH and similar (2nd part of the "Celebration" line) could put staccatos on each of these notes except for beat 2.5. That beat is a held out more than the rest
- m18 RH beat 1.5 put this note or the LH one in parentheses or consider bumping the RH part up another octave because it doesn't come through all that well (abasically have at as same octave of the lower RH layer of m27-30). Additionally, I do not hear notes on beat 3 and 3.5 in the RH.         
- m15-16 and m19-20 and similar of the "Celebration" line: I do not hear the notes between the octaves (ex. G-G instead of G-D-G). I think having this inner part doesn't add much and somewhat takes away from the main melody notes. The melody of this "Celebration" line is very bright, and adding inner voices to the melody octaves adds too much texture.
- m22-m26 RH I also do not hear the notes between the octaves (ex. E-E instead of E-B-E), removing them also makes this part easier. Same points of the previous bullet apply regarding texture.

Basically, just remove any notes that are between the two melody octaves.

Spoiler

[close]

- m24 RH beat 2 you could put a tenuto mark on this A as it is held a bit before the gliss
- m26 RH beat 1 should be a quarter rest the last note doesn't tie over from previous measure
- m27-m29 I hear the the ascending portion is A-B-E-F# and the descending 16th line is G-E-C#-B
- Overall for m27-29 I would just remove the bottom layer of the RH here. The descending line overlaps with top layer notes and gets so close to the A's in the lower layer anyway that it's probably better to remove the lower layer.
- m29 RH if you keep separate layers, unhide the quarter rest in the lower layer, flip the upper layer beat 1
- m30 RH upper layer the A's should be G's. If you slow down this part enough the four eight notes actually are four sets of descending triplets (G-F#-E) but I don't believe it is possible for that rhythm to be played so leave the rhythm as is.
   - and for beat 2 I would do alternating octaves, something like this:

Spoiler

[close]

   
- m39-43 LH Split these separate voices into separate layers for m39 and m41 and m43, similar to m40 or m42
   - Also important to note for this choral melody part- the LH bassline notes are technically an octave lower than they are currently written out, I would just make edits so that they are always below the melody LH notes rather than in m40 where the bassline goes on top of the LH melody.
- m41 bassline layer - the notes are G#, G# down an octave, C#, C#
- m42 LH beat 4 lower layer this is a C#
- m45-46 LH lower layer these are Gn not G#
- m47 RH beat 3 the A from the previous beats doesn't shift to G# but stays at A. This A to G# downward shift doesn't occur until beat 3 of m48.
- m48 beat 3 I would also put a tenuto on both hands given these notes are held for another beat in the original
- m57-58 here's another instance like m47 where the note changes are jumping the gun a bit - beat 3-4 of m57 do not descend from An, not until beat 3 of m58.
   - Also for m57-58 LH I would structure these chords the same way as m10. The Bn needs to be represented in these E
- m58 RH top layer you could put staccatos on the descending 8th note line


As for the trick you were asking about for key changes at the end of the song: create an extra measure at the end, hide the rest that is in the measure. Create a key change for that measure, which will display the key you want to show for the measure you are repeating back to. For cleaning up and finishing hiding the measure, use the measure tool in Finale (if you have it) to decrease the size of the measure and remove the lines. I would also refer to my "Antenna Cradle" Goldeneye 64 sheet as I had to do the same thing there.

Spoiler

[close]

[Fantastic Ike]

Can you tell this is an older sheet of mine

But for real, thanks for being patient and looking it over! Honestly didn't think it would've taken this much work. Should be fixed up now, working with new version of Finale now so hopefully there aren't any weird glitches.

[Kricketune54]

Can you tell this is an older sheet of mine

I think it's worth checking over an older sheet before submitting, especially if there's a difference between previous arranging abilities/understanding.


Formatting
- I should've been more explicit about this, but there's a lot more that could've been done with the format of this sheet after fixing the accompaniment. Here's a dropbox link for what I think would work well as far as system spacing. In short, the first page needs more space and would work better as 4 systems, 5 on pages 2 and 3, and 3 systems on the final page. Make your page 3 systems a little lower than my file's though.
- Let's take a look at dynamics again. I think you removed a few when changing the LH part, and there's at least one places where a crescendo would make sense.
   - you could have a cresc. starting in m47, going into a forte in m49.
- move the forte in m2 a little to the left (center over/under beat 1 noteheads)
- for the choral section, you could add legato expression text for m39 above beat 1.

Spoiler

[close]

I thought slurs might be a good idea but it is going to be messy with both the LH and RH. Add cresc. as opposed to < for m47-48 , or do simile to indicate the end of the legato section. I personally prefer the simile option

Spoiler

[close]

Notes

m3 and elsewhere beat 4 the LH doesn't exactly have a part that makes this rhythm.

- following up on this feedback, I gave it a relisten and it does sound like there's some low notes that do a A-C#-E rhythm at the octaves you had. I had to go back and listen because it honestly sounded too empty having just a rest there... basically revert to the LH you had for that fourth beat, but minus the C's on top like there are in the RH (see below screenshot)

Spoiler

[close]

- m11-14 gave this a relisten as well and you should hear a quiet triangle part on the and of every beat. Also the part is technically up an octave from what is there originally. Remove staccatos (see image example)

Spoiler

[close]

- m22 RH beat 3.5-4.5, m23 RH 3.5-4.0, basically between the second half of m22 and the end of m26 could put staccatos on each of these eighth notes in the RH that are not tied to another pitch, with exception to beat 4.5 of m25, beat 3.5 of m26, don't put staccatos on those specific beats, and add a tenuto on 4.5 of m26. Staccato also on beat 2 of m26 (quarter note)
Sorry for not calling that out on the first go through

- m27 RH the order of the runs is actually somewhat inverted here, see screenshot:

Spoiler

[close]

- m31 RH this jump is going to be very tough to make, especially considering the 16th and sextuplet bits of m30. I would either remove the top note of beat 1, or put a parantheses around it and shrink the notehead size (I would refer to this sheet, m18 rH beat 4.5 as an example if you go the second route https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/1393)

I forgot to mention this when making your hidden key change last measure, but if you're looking to have a playback without an awkward rest (which is what happens when there's a hidden quarter rest at the end), you can change the time signature to the lowest setting possible (1/32nd) so that measure is basically nonexistent

Spoiler

[close]

[Fantastic Ike]

I think it's worth checking over an older sheet before submitting, especially if there's a difference between previous arranging abilities/understanding.

Yeah this is the revised version, guess I didn't do a good enough job of it tho

move the forte in m2 a little to the left (center over/under beat 1 noteheads)

Do you mean to the right? It was already skewed pretty left of center

m31 RH this jump is going to be very tough to make, especially considering the 16th and sextuplet bits of m30. I would either remove the top note of beat 1, or put a parantheses around it and shrink the notehead size (I would refer to this sheet, m18 rH beat 4.5 as an example if you go the second route https://www.ninsheetmusic.org/download/pdf/1393)

Is there a standard size for the little note? I put mine at 70%

But that should be everything, thanks for looking this over! You're practically an updater by this point!

[Kricketune54]

Yeah this is the revised version, guess I didn't do a good enough job of it tho

it's a relatively tough, dense, track; a lot of my feedback was predicated on using Audacity both to pitch up/down parts and to slow down the tempo. Techniques like that helps make rhythms and chords much clearer from what you are hearing versus what's actually there.

That does take a lot of time, but that's also just a simple fact of what sort of work needs to go into arrangements like this for high accuracy.

Do you mean to the right? It was already skewed pretty left of center

Yes I did mean right, sorry.

Is there a standard size for the little note? I put mine at 70%

I think 75% is what I've done not aware if there is a real standard

But that should be everything, thanks for looking this over! You're practically an updater by this point!

You're welcome! Hope to see this up in the new year sometime soon.

[Fantastic Ike]

Mhm, thanks for your patience!

[XiaoMigros]

Is there a standard size for the little note? I put mine at 70%

I think 75% is what I've done not aware if there is a real standard

The default value from the template is 75%, so best go with that. That said, if you don't think the small note is playable, I think it would best be removed.

• I feel like m17-18 and m18-19 RH (and similar) could do with some articulation/slurs
• The arpeggios in m28 are up-down, rather than down-up in m27. Also, have you considered including more of the notes in m30?
• m39-46: By playing the RH in octaves, you're not really able to include all of the harmony that can be heard. I think removing the higher octave and adding in said harmony would help create a stronger contrast compared to the rest of the track, what do you think?
• m47-48: If you want you could switch up the LH part to reflect the rise in intensity, but leaving it works too
• m56 b2 RH: I hear an upward arpeggio in the strings here
• I don't think it's worth changing key signatures in this sheet. The change to C is very short, and is immediately followed by E, leading back to A.

[Fantastic Ike]

Also, have you considered including more of the notes in m30?

You mean the A-C-A pattern at the beginning? I think it might interfere with the "build" of the song

m39-46: By playing the RH in octaves, you're not really able to include all of the harmony that can be heard. I think removing the higher octave and adding in said harmony would help create a stronger contrast compared to the rest of the track, what do you think?

Yeah, giving that a shot. Might have to change it some more but yeah

m56 b2 RH: I hear an upward arpeggio in the strings here

I don't hear anything different here than in other instances. If you think I should have that run up for every time though I'll try to add that.

Everything else should be changed

[XiaoMigros]

You mean the A-C-A pattern at the beginning? I think it might interfere with the "build" of the song

Sorry, I meant including more of the arpeggios rather than leaving them as 8ths.

I don't hear anything different here than in other instances. If you think I should have that run up for every time though I'll try to add that.

Ah yeah, I'm hearing it in the other places too now. If you find a way to incorporate it that you're happy with, it can be changed, and if not it should be fine as is.

[Fantastic Ike]

Sorry, I meant including more of the arpeggios rather than leaving them as 8ths.

Think me and Kricketune talked about this, I think we decided that the arpeggios were too difficult to play as is so we went with 8ths

Ah yeah, I'm hearing it in the other places too now. If you find a way to incorporate it that you're happy with, it can be changed, and if not it should be fine as is.

I'll mull it over. In the meantime thanks for looking the sheet over!

[Latios212]

Just happen to be peeking in a bit and want to bring up a few things:
- For the intro section as well as its reocurrence on the last page, I'd highly recommend writing the right hand with two layers. The overlap between the two layers is not super apparent visually, and the different rhythms on the triplet look a bit odd written together.
- In m. 11, I'd suggest putting parentheses around the single notehead that you're referring to in your text direction to make it clearer.
- Use Finale's tool for implementing pickup measures instead of including a measure with a different time signature, as this will throw off the measure numbering. To do this, change the first measure back to 4/4 and choose Document > Pickup Measure. Make sure to do this after implementing the rest of the feedback as it'll shift all the measures.

Measures 39-44 (the measures under the 8va) need some work. Two things about it:
- Try to avoid 8va bass clef in the right hand. Generally speaking what you want to write can still come across clearly either in treble clef or bass clef. Using an 8va bass clef here adds some mental load to the performer, and in particular makes it more difficult to tell how far apart the left and right hand parts are. Removing the 8va here makes it easier to see the next thing...
- The notes in the upper layer in the left hand are also present in the right hand part currently. I assume you meant to remove the voice from one of the hands?

[Fantastic Ike]

Measures 39-44 (the measures under the 8va) need some work. Two things about it:
- Try to avoid 8va bass clef in the right hand. Generally speaking what you want to write can still come across clearly either in treble clef or bass clef. Using an 8va bass clef here adds some mental load to the performer, and in particular makes it more difficult to tell how far apart the left and right hand parts are. Removing the 8va here makes it easier to see the next thing...
- The notes in the upper layer in the left hand are also present in the right hand part currently. I assume you meant to remove the voice from one of the hands?

Wasn't sure how to show this. Seemed too high for regular bass and too low for regular treble. I'll just keep it at bass for now. And yeah sorry I did mean to remove it, I have to import from Musescore so sometimes there's things that fall through the cracks.

Updated

[XiaoMigros]

I think it's alright in treble clef, it looks a little weird but its still quite readable as the constant octaves provide a good sense of orientation. That would be my stylistic preference but bass clef does reduce the amount of ledger lines..

For the upper voice triplets in m2 and similar, you can hide their brackets (if you beam over the rest, which needs doing in 2 more cases).