[PC] The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky - "A Cat Relaxing in the Sun" by cacabish

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky
Console: PC
Title: A Cat Relaxing in the Sun
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: cacabish

[attachment deleted by admin]

[cacabish]

The only main concern I have with this one is the allocation of hands for measures 29-31.

• Whether a one-off cross-stave note is appropriate in m.29 & 31, b.4
• Whether the LH bracket in m.30 is appropriate, how big the brackets should be, where they're positioned, should I use an ending bracket or a RH bracket to signal the return, etc.

[XiaoMigros]

This looks good!

Whether a one-off cross-stave note is appropriate in m.29 & 31, b.4

I address this further down

Whether the LH bracket in m.30 is appropriate, how big the brackets should be, where they're positioned, should I use an ending bracket or a RH bracket to signal the return, etc.

I think they look good as they are! If you want you can add a text marking (L.H. , or m.s. if you're feeling really fancy) in front of the very first hook, just to set clear what their purpose is.

• m15: I think there's a G tucked beneath the B in the RH
• m23: I don't think the A at beat 2.5 is restruck by the LH
• m26+: I hear chords of some kind sustained throughout the measure, do you think its worth including those in, say, beat 1 of the LH? You could use more open voicings like octaves or fifths, so it doesn't sound too dense..
• For this section, do you think it's worth moving more of the RH lower layer to the LH? Since the pedal is sustained there and the LH doesn't have that much else to do, it might help take some weight off the RH.
• You might want to consider omitting the F# at m26 beat 3; the minor 2nd causes (presumably) unwanted harmonic tension.
• The last system has space for 4 measures, using that would mean your systems can be less cramped

[cacabish]

Just wanted to put something down, but I'm working on your feedback, Xiao! I've been very busy this past week and I'll be at VGM Con all weekend, so I will get things updated early next week!

Stay tuned!

[cacabish]

• m15: I think there's a G tucked beneath the B in the RH

Yup! Missed that one.

• m23: I don't think the A at beat 2.5 is restruck by the LH

Yeah, I was going for a shared-hand kinda thing, but I can rework that.

• m26+: I hear chords of some kind sustained throughout the measure, do you think its worth including those in, say, beat 1 of the LH? You could use more open voicings like octaves or fifths, so it doesn't sound too dense..

Sorta? It sounds like to me it's mostly the organ's countermelody, but I do hear a pretty strong beat 1, so maybe just do octaves? That's what I've done, at least. Let me know what you think!

• For this section, do you think it's worth moving more of the RH lower layer to the LH? Since the pedal is sustained there and the LH doesn't have that much else to do, it might help take some weight off the RH.

Yeah, I've been wanting to do that, but this is surprisingly hard for this piece to notate, as the pitches are too high for cross-staff beamings, and the lower voice does go above the upper voice in m27. Still, do you think the best way is just with more LH brackets like I did in m.30? I'm just very unsure of how to best notate this.

• You might want to consider omitting the F# at m26 beat 3; the minor 2nd causes (presumably) unwanted harmonic tension.

I will admit the dissonance is a bit more forward here than in the original, but it's not for very long and it is exactly what the melody and countermelody are playing, so I think it's just fine.

• The last system has space for 4 measures, using that would mean your systems can be less cramped

Did you have something in mind with this? Because I don't think any of my systems are cramped. Besides, the final system contains a measure that is basically the same as m.1, and both start their respective systems, so it's a nice parallelism, I feel.

---
Files are updated! Thanks for the feedback, Xiao!

[XiaoMigros]

Sorta? It sounds like to me it's mostly the organ's countermelody, but I do hear a pretty strong beat 1, so maybe just do octaves? That's what I've done, at least. Let me know what you think!

This looks great!

Yeah, I've been wanting to do that, but this is surprisingly hard for this piece to notate, as the pitches are too high for cross-staff beamings, and the lower voice does go above the upper voice in m27. Still, do you think the best way is just with more LH brackets like I did in m.30? I'm just very unsure of how to best notate this.

I think brackets would work better here than cross-staff beams, but to be honest you can leave it as is (since it's playable) and let the performer decide what to do on their own, to avoid adding unnecessary clutter.

Did you have something in mind with this? Because I don't think any of my systems are cramped. Besides, the final system contains a measure that is basically the same as m.1, and both start their respective systems, so it's a nice parallelism, I feel.

The point with m1 I agree with, but the last measure does look a bit lonely.. Personally I would go with 3 measures on every system on page 2, but it's up to you really

Thanks for finding the time to look over this!

[cacabish]

I think brackets would work better here than cross-staff beams, but to be honest you can leave it as is (since it's playable) and let the performer decide what to do on their own, to avoid adding unnecessary clutter.

Yeah, that's pretty much my mentality at this point. I had a whole bunch of brackets at one point, but it was definitely kinda cluttery, so I just made it so the worst offending notes were hit, so I'll leave it like this for now.

The point with m1 I agree with, but the last measure does look a bit lonely.. Personally I would go with 3 measures on every system on page 2, but it's up to you really

Not a bad idea, however, the problem with I have with that is that it blends the two phrases together (m.18-25 and m.26-34), with no discernable break between them. Here, when the organ comes in on m.26 and the phrase is added upon, it happens naturally at the start of a system, signaling the transition and there's a nice visual separation between the two parts. So, I'll just roll with what I've got.

Thanks for the input, Xiao! As always, it's greatly appreciated!

[XiaoMigros]

Thanks for the input, Xiao! As always, it's greatly appreciated!

You're welcome! I have nothing to add and I'm happy with the sheet in its current state, so I will approve~

[Latios212]

Very relaxing piece, thank you for your patience ^^

Just one correction to point out: Last two LH notes of m. 11 should be A and E (same as m. 15, different from m. 9).

Everything else looks good! Though I would like to raise some food for thought. The final section is fine as you have it, but could be simplified a lot by lowering the middle layer arpeggios an octave and playing them with the left hand past beat 2 (or even past beat 1) -
You cannot view this attachment.
It'd help the melody stand out more and make the whole sheet rather easy to play. Don't need to go and overhaul everything, but just something to think about!

[cacabish]

Just one correction to point out: Last two LH notes of m. 11 should be A and E (same as m. 15, different from m. 9).

Huh. Good catch! How did I miss that? Alright, that should be fixed!

Everything else looks good! Though I would like to raise some food for thought. The final section is fine as you have it, but could be simplified a lot by lowering the middle layer arpeggios an octave and playing them with the left hand past beat 2 (or even past beat 1) -
You cannot view this attachment.
It'd help the melody stand out more and make the whole sheet rather easy to play. Don't need to go and overhaul everything, but just something to think about!

Hmmm, a very interesting idea! While I definitely agree it would greatly simplify things, I think it would lose too much in other key areas. Main things being (a) I don't consider the organ's melody as all that "stand-out-ish"; it's there and it's different, but, in my opinion, it's not center stage and the main focus is how it complements the guitars, so dropping the arpeggiating guitar an octave makes it stand out too much. In other words, I feel that the interweaving, interplay, and complementing nature between the organ and the arpeggiating guitar is the central focus of this section, not just the organ's melody. And (b) it's clear that m26-33 are just m18-25 with an organ on top, so dropping the arpeggiating guitar an octave breaks that link between the two sections, whereas now, whilst it's kinda messy, still shows that parallelism in the music, which I think does the original more justice. So, in summary, I think it's a great idea! I just think that it's not as applicable for this part.

However, I have changed a couple of the cross-staff beamings in m.29-33 to try to make it more clear what hand does what and trying to minimize RH movement as much as possible, so definitely give that a once over before accepting! Thanks Latios for the great input!

[Latios212]

Alrighty, thank you for the thoughtfulness put into it! It definitely works as is for the reasons you provided, so no further comments there

Cross-staffing looks good! There are a few places I might personally choose to choose the other hand to play a note, but what you have is completely sensible. The main thing I would mention is that in m. 30, you strongly imply that the left hand should play the middle layer after the first note, whereas I think beat 2.5 (and maybe 3) would be easier for the right hand to take to avoid a large jump in the left hand from beat 2. Beat 4.5 might be better off with the right hand too to lead into the next measure. It's easy enough for the performer to decide what they want to do, but you could cross-staff similar to the other surrounding measures.

Given that that's an optional suggestion, I'll accept whenever you're satisfied with it!

[cacabish]

The main thing I would mention is that in m. 30, you strongly imply that the left hand should play the middle layer after the first note, whereas I think beat 2.5 (and maybe 3) would be easier for the right hand to take to avoid a large jump in the left hand from beat 2. Beat 4.5 might be better off with the right hand too to lead into the next measure. It's easy enough for the performer to decide what they want to do, but you could cross-staff similar to the other surrounding measures.

Definitely a good point and definitely flows better, plus, it gets rid of the LH lines!
Alright, I've modified m.30. I think everywhere else is good now. Thanks Latios!

[Latios212]

Splendid! Let's get this in

You cannot view this attachment.

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Latios212.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot