[MUL] Assassin's Creed II - "Ezio's Family" by JDMEK5

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Other
Game: Assassin's Creed II
Console: Multiplatform
Title: Ezio's Family
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: JDMEK5

[attachment deleted by admin]

[JDMEK5]

[Maelstrom]

Beautiful arrangement.
I did notice something, though.
-You notated most of the overlapping layers by placing the notes overtop of each other, but that is not the case in m26
-The 8va in m42 is missing the dashed line like all the others.
-This sounds even more nitpicky, but a few of those 8va markings have a noticeably longer dashed line. Compare m11-12 to m13-14
-Have you considered using the measure tool to space out the eighth notes next to the double whole notes for a little breathing space?

Absolutely beautiful arrangement, btw.

[Sebastian]

Yo JD, such a beautiful song!!
Some things I noticed:
- M. 1 & 2-7.

Spoiler

[close]

Green: Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what I'm hearing for the left hand of M. 2. The first half of M. 2 (according to the original) is 8th rest, D, D, F. I didn't know if you did this purposely or not to accommodate for the sheet? The second half of M. 2 is D, D (octave higher), F.
You could also notate it like this:

Spoiler

[close]

This one is probably most faithful to the original, but it is up to you!
Also, in the measures you have the D tied, it's still like the example(s) above. The left hand of M. 2-7 are the same.

Lime Green: I would put the dynamic markings in the middle (where possible) throughout the entire piece, minus where you have both hands playing 2 different volumes.

Blue: Instead of using the text tool for the "Con Pedale ad lib.", you should use the expression text under expression tool. Same with M. 42 & 59.

- I always feel like a fool for saying this, but the composer/arranger names need right-aligned

Other than that (and what Maelstrom pointed out), nothing else really pops out at me. Awesome work with this beautiful song!

[Latios212]

Woo, awesome sheet! Let's see what hasn't already been said...

- Page 4: Any reason why you have 3-measure systems here? I'd suggest just keeping it 2 for the entire piece.
- m. 34: Yeah there are two separate layers but I'd recommend flipping the ties as normal since there's nothing above it - the other layer just plays one note at the beginning. It looks kinda funny this way. Same thing could be said about the first few pages, bottom staff, to a lesser extent.
- Noteheads need overlapping in measures 50-53.

[JDMEK5]

Beautiful arrangement.
I did notice something, though.
-You notated most of the overlapping layers by placing the notes overtop of each other, but that is not the case in m26
-The 8va in m42 is missing the dashed line like all the others.
-This sounds even more nitpicky, but a few of those 8va markings have a noticeably longer dashed line. Compare m11-12 to m13-14
-Have you considered using the measure tool to space out the eighth notes next to the double whole notes for a little breathing space?

Absolutely beautiful arrangement, btw.

Got it. Thanks!

Yo JD, such a beautiful song!!
Some things I noticed:
- M. 1 & 2-7.

Spoiler

[close]

Green: Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is what I'm hearing for the left hand of M. 2. The first half of M. 2 (according to the original) is 8th rest, D, D, F. I didn't know if you did this purposely or not to accommodate for the sheet? The second half of M. 2 is D, D (octave higher), F.
You could also notate it like this:

Spoiler

[close]

This one is probably most faithful to the original, but it is up to you!

Ah, right. Got that. Thanks for the catch.

Also, in the measures you have the D tied, it's still like the example(s) above. The left hand of M. 2-7 are the same.

On the contrary, I feel extremely sure of those ties where I have them. If, however, I am wrong, I would still suggest leaving it as is because that's how it's best replicated.

Lime Green: I would put the dynamic markings in the middle (where possible) throughout the entire piece, minus where you have both hands playing 2 different volumes.

But I did, no?

Blue: Instead of using the text tool for the "Con Pedale ad lib.", you should use the expression text under expression tool. Same with M. 42 & 59.

It literally looks the same but doesn't actually do the pedal in the playback, which is better as I'd rather have it not go at all through the piece than run through the spots where it shouldn't be.

- I always feel like a fool for saying this, but the composer/arranger names need right-aligned

Hehehe oops xD

Woo, awesome sheet! Let's see what hasn't already been said...

- Page 4: Any reason why you have 3-measure systems here? I'd suggest just keeping it 2 for the entire piece.

Idk, just to save paper? If you really think I should change it then I will but it lines up in time for page 5 and they don't need to be that spread. It's using more space than is needed.

- m. 34: Yeah there are two separate layers but I'd recommend flipping the ties as normal since there's nothing above it - the other layer just plays one note at the beginning. It looks kinda funny this way. Same thing could be said about the first few pages, bottom staff, to a lesser extent.

Got it.

- Noteheads need overlapping in measures 50-53.

Fixed.

Updated.

[Bespinben]

Idk, just to save paper?

I think what Latios is getting at is the fact that, since you ALREADY have a 9th page with only 1 system on it, you might as well use the rest of it. There's no more or less paper saved, essentially.

(yes/no soon so I/we can accept this beauty)

[JDMEK5]

Yes I completely understand. I'll update it in just a second here. As soon as I do another sheet real quick.

EDIT: Urk, problem: that spot has 7 measures. Meaning if I go 2 per system then it'll throw the rest of it all off. Other solution?

[Zeta]

This submission has been accepted by Bespinben.

~Zeta, your friendly NSM-Bot