cacabish's "Too Hot To Handle" Project Sheet(s)

[Bloop]

Awesome, looks good! I will accept Inferno!
You cannot view this attachment.

[XiaoMigros]

Nice sheet, not much to say here!

• I think in this sheet, when you have 8th+8th rest it would be better off as staccato quarter notes? I'm getting 'short, but not too short vibes rather than 'hold exactly an eighth then release exactly an eighth'. Up to you though, that's just my 2 cents
• m3 and similar: I don't hear beat 2.5 as staccato
• m4 and similar: beat 1 doesnt sound staccato either
• maybe it's better to use legato 8ths and staccato quarters for the bass? though it does lose some snappiness...
• The 16th triplets would look neater as mordents IMO, what do you think?
• m25-33: Since the tonal center kinda shifts to F here for a few measures, it makes more sense to use Gb and Db in this section than F# and C#. You'll notice the melody follows more logical steps as a result, too
• m33 and m36 sound a bit bare in parts, compared to what's going on in the original. For m33, you could add a low Db at beat 1 and a low Bb at beat 3, maybe? and for m36 a low Bb at beat 3.
• m39: I hear an Eb at beat 2.75 in the low LH layer
• System spacing: 4-4-4 systems per page, instead of 5-5-2?
• For the time signature, I'm hearing 2/2 rather than 4/4, how about you?

[cacabish]

• I think in this sheet, when you have 8th+8th rest it would be better off as staccato quarter notes? I'm getting 'short, but not too short vibes rather than 'hold exactly an eighth then release exactly an eighth'. Up to you though, that's just my 2 cents

Yeah, I can see that and I think it's a decent enough idea, however, I do like the consistency across the eighth notes. Besides, then I'm kinda using staccatos just for length instead of length+articulation. So, I think I prefer the eighths.

• m3 and similar: I don't hear beat 2.5 as staccato
• m4 and similar: beat 1 doesnt sound staccato either

Yep, simple enough fixes!

• maybe it's better to use legato 8ths and staccato quarters for the bass? though it does lose some snappiness...

Same as above and I kinda like the snappy bass, especially in this arabeseque-style music.

• The 16th triplets would look neater as mordents IMO, what do you think?

At this speed, mordents and 16th triplets are basically equivalent, but I (personally) like the look of a slick triplet thrown in amongst eighth notes. It really grabs your attention and makes you appreciate the rhythm over a mordent. It definitely gives a piece more character. That's just my personal preference.

• m25-33: Since the tonal center kinda shifts to F here for a few measures, it makes more sense to use Gb and Db in this section than F# and C#. You'll notice the melody follows more logical steps as a result, too

Oooh, yeah, that's a great idea! That definitely cleans up a lot! The reason I didn't go for it is because F# is the 3rd of D, which is the V here, and is commonly used throughout, so I was mostly focusing on that.

• m33 and m36 sound a bit bare in parts, compared to what's going on in the original. For m33, you could add a low Db at beat 1 and a low Bb at beat 3, maybe? and for m36 a low Bb at beat 3.

Ehhh, perhaps so. Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of trying to cram every last note into every beat. And given that this section is like the sweeping sands with the rise and falls and more legato compared to the bouncy A section, I think leaving off layers allows for that to shine. However, if you think there would be great benefit from adding on extra bits there, I can pursue that.

• m39: I hear an Eb at beat 2.75 in the low LH layer

Hmmm, I'm not hearing that. And I'm going to plead that makes it inconsistent as m43 mirrors m39 and it doesn't have it either (as far as I can tell).

• System spacing: 4-4-4 systems per page, instead of 5-5-2?

Yeah, that's a good idea. If I'm going to use 3 pages, I might as well own the 3 pages. Thanks for the tip!

• For the time signature, I'm hearing 2/2 rather than 4/4, how about you?

I still have no idea what's the significant difference between 2/2 and 4/4 other than speed and marching... kinda? And this meets the speed requirement. I do also admit it'd be easier to conduct this in 2 instead of 4, particularly at this tempo, so I think that's probably enough justification to make it 2/2. Thanks! I've also updated the tempo marking to a half note (I often forget to make that change)

---
Alright, I think that's everything! Thanks for all the feedback, Xiao! And sorry it took me so long to respond; I was occupied prepping for a guest math lecture at my local college and I decided to program my PowerPoint (looked amazing, but took like 20-30 hours of work). File is updated!

[XiaoMigros]

Ehhh, perhaps so. Personally, I'm not the biggest fan of trying to cram every last note into every beat. And given that this section is like the sweeping sands with the rise and falls and more legato compared to the bouncy A section, I think leaving off layers allows for that to shine. However, if you think there would be great benefit from adding on extra bits there, I can pursue that.

Personally I feel like having more notes helps get that sweeping feeling across quite well, but I'm okay with leaving things as is too, since thats the educated conclusion you came to

Hmmm, I'm not hearing that. And I'm going to plead that makes it inconsistent as m43 mirrors m39 and it doesn't have it either (as far as I can tell).

sorry, I meant the low RH layer, not RH. I'm still hearing it there FWIW

[cacabish]

Personally I feel like having more notes helps get that sweeping feeling across quite well, but I'm okay with leaving things as is too, since thats the educated conclusion you came to

Then let's just leave it at that

sorry, I meant the low RH layer, not RH. I'm still hearing it there FWIW

Ahhh, gotcha. And yeah, it's this slide into the D that I didn't notice. Good catch! I've added it as a grace note.

---
Thanks Xiao! You're awesome!
I also redid the first measure to use two layers as an experiment and I think it looks nicer, but if you disagree, let me know and I'll change it back.

[XiaoMigros]

Looks great! for the first measure, I think having two layers here is redundant since they play on exactly the same beats for the same durations, but I'm okay accepting whatever you think is best :p

[cacabish]

I personally like the two layers because m.2 is two layers, so it really flows into that nicely and is, technically, representative of what the instruments are playing. That said, I'm 100% in agreement of it being unnecessary as both layers are playing on the same beats and for the same durations, but I think I prefer the current version of the two separate layers, so let's roll with that!

[XiaoMigros]

cool, in that case Spiny Desert is accepted! Thanks for participating in this project