[NDS] Pokémon Black Version & Pokémon White Version - "Battle! (Trainer Battle)" by JDMEK5

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Pokémon
Game: Pokémon Black Version & Pokémon White Version
Console: Nintendo DS
Title: Battle! (Trainer Battle)
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: JDMEK5

[attachment deleted by admin]

[JDMEK5]

[joeberryosponge]

I would change the accidentals to sharps in m.m. 13-14 in the right hand since you have sharps in the left hand.

[Latios212]

Cool sheet. Always thought this trainer battle theme was a bit odd compared to the ones in other gens. Can't place a finger on it...

- Fix hypermeter on page 3, or was that intentional?
- Courtesy dynamics at the forward repeat for clarity and functional playback.
- Perhaps a tenuto on the first note of 35 to indicate that it's part of the different layer that's sustained!
- F flats against E naturals in 41
- Extra accidental on F# in 10 (oh wait maybe that was intentional too)
- 3 and 7 look a bit... odd. Actually on a closer listen I think the gliss. starts on beat 4, which would get rid of some ties and also give the performer more time to slam all those keys.

Probably more to come another time

[Latios212]

[Latios212]

[SlowPokemon]

Easily one of the worst looking sheets I've ever seen. Why do you even include key signatures, since you don't use them consistently and don't seem to have any concept of what the key is?

3-6: E minor (may seem like intro, but it's important to mark the key since we will when it's sequenced a half step up in the next few bars)
7-24: F minor
25-54: E-flat major
Kind of tricky how you'd want to notate the rest, but the harmony we're getting for the rest is:
55-56: F major
57-58: G major
59-62: A major
63-64: G minor
And then I'd definitely include the keys for:
65-66: C-sharp minor
67-70: G-sharp minor or A-flat minor
Then again with the ascending harmonies:
71-72: A major
73-74: B major or C-flat major
75-end: C-sharp major or D-flat major

Since we're in F minor at the beginning part, F-sharp is basically never going to appear. Any place you have F-sharp in that key area (such as bars 13-14, which you inexplicably have G-flat in the RH against F-sharp in the LH) should be changed to G-flat, and yes, those C-sharps should be D-flats and those D-sharps should be E-flats. Other noteworthy wrong accidentals: the B/F-sharp in m. 6 (should be C-flat/G-flat), and pretty much anything where you have enharmonics of one note in the same measure.

I'm also just not sold on this annoying "include everything" style you and Ben adopt (though he's at least cleaner about it). Even if I accept the weird technique things (like that the glissando somehow ends in a chord that requires the performer's entire hand), there are SO MANY unnecessary inner voices that are only going to make this already challenging piece so much more difficult and awkward for the kids who come to this site to play this music. All this is doing is discouraging young pianists, not to mention teaching them to expect poorly-written music and to accept this kind of awkward, unrealistic writing as a permissible piano score. I really feel that not just this, but all of your arrangements could benefit endlessly from this kind of practical thought rather than trying to exactly recreate the original piece in a needlessly convoluted and cluttered sheet. I'm not a moderator or anything, but I would never dream of accepting a sheet that looks like this.

[Latios212]

Damn. Uh...

I'm sure JD will pop in here soon enough, but I want to comment on that last part.

- Firstly as updater it's not really my job to dictate exactly how a track is to be arranged. Everyone has their own style of arranging and so long as someone gives sufficient thought to the arrangement of parts, it sounds good, looks good, and ends up "playable", I respect that. People's sheets will vary from others` in terms of style and difficulty, and that's okay.
- You're over-generalizing quite a bit. There's nothing wrong with the majority of this sheet in terms of simplicity of execution - it's just the eighth note bassline (very simple most of the way through) with melody as octave chords. If you want to contest something like measure 25, just say so instead of bashing the whole sheet. I have my reservations about playability of certain sections, but that doesn't mean the whole sheet is bad.
- There's a difference between overcomplicating a sheet for a relatively simple track and making a difficult sheet for a more complex one. Pokémon battle themes are inherently difficult pieces due to things like the high tempo and chromatic intro; I wouldn't recommend them to beginning pianists. Also keep in mind that we don't necessarily cater to one type or level of pianist. There are plenty of videos on YouTube of people playing pretty lossless covers of battle themes.

[SlowPokemon]

That's fair, it was late and I was really angry about this for some reason

[JDMEK5]

Sorry guys; I was gone but now am back. And not gonna lie, this is one of my earlier arrangements so I'm not at all surprised at all the issues. I had meant to do a revamp right away but for whatever reason it didn't happen and yeah. I'll take a day and make it decent.

I'm also just not sold on this annoying "include everything" style you and Ben adopt (though he's at least cleaner about it). Even if I accept the weird technique things (like that the glissando somehow ends in a chord that requires the performer's entire hand), there are SO MANY unnecessary inner voices that are only going to make this already challenging piece so much more difficult and awkward for the kids who come to this site to play this music. All this is doing is discouraging young pianists, not to mention teaching them to expect poorly-written music and to accept this kind of awkward, unrealistic writing as a permissible piano score. I really feel that not just this, but all of your arrangements could benefit endlessly from this kind of practical thought rather than trying to exactly recreate the original piece in a needlessly convoluted and cluttered sheet. I'm not a moderator or anything, but I would never dream of accepting a sheet that looks like this.

All very fair points. This sheet will look quite different by the time I'm done with it.

If it helps explain why the sheet is the way it is, this came from a time where I used to include as many notes as possible for whatever reason cuz that made more sound in the playback and that's what mattered to me back then. So yeah. I'll post again when I finish and we can start a real reviewing procedure.

But yeah no this is totally an awful sheet as it currently is. I admire your blunt honesty, Slow (I'm serious; not sarcastic).

[SlowPokemon]

I'm sorry for being so harsh, it doesn't need THAT much revamping and it was a bad exaggeration to say all of your arrangements are this way. But I definitely think it could benefit from a bit of polish. (And it definitely makes sense if you say this was created at a time when your arrangements were focused on something else)

[JDMEK5]

Haha it's ok. I'll totally admit that this sheet as it is now is horrendous but I will say that there's no way all my work is this bad (especially my current stuff). But yeah no it's being 2016-ified as I type this so it should be much improved within the hour.

EDIT:

I've done a bunch of general fixes and improvements. I'll still fine tune it more yet but now it's something I can feel ok about having my name on. I don't think I implemented all of your suggested key changes, Slow, but I'll return to that later today when I have the time. Also, I'll look more closely at Latios' initial comments.

[Bespinben]

I'm also just not sold on this annoying "include everything" style you and Ben adopt (though he's at least cleaner about it).

I'm going to hijack this thread for a moment and state, once and for all, that the Ben who did this died in 2012. In fact, I get so much flack for NOT doing this from the staff that I've been inactive for the last 3 months because I got sick of trying to defend my stance on pianistically minded reductions in the wake of the cult of mindless do-it-all transcription. "Sympathy and Sincerity", "Lets Go to School",... it's a wonder these two pieces even passed the radar given their complete reworking of the source material. No matter how many "proof of playablity" videos I tag onto subs, no matter how much I get actual pianists like latios212 and dajwxp to test run my works WHILE IN PROGRESS, for some reason, this perception of my style just doesn't seem to want to die.

Even if we account for some of the few more demanding arrangements of mine from the last 6 months, I still have testimony to their integrity:

(in response to PSMD Foreboding Forest)

And um, now I'm eyeing your most recent release. I love how your arrangements flow wonderfully on the piano (i.e. thoughtful writing), and to add some icing on the cake you throw in fun flourishes and interwoven parts for the performer to explore.

(in response to PSMD Lets Go to School)

I treated this piece as an exercise in effective crafting of accompaniment textures in piano reductions. Written verbatim, the exact combination of bass, guitar, and pizzicato strings which make up the accompaniment in the OST results in an unpleasant wall of sonic mush, even if playable solo. By condensing and reinterpreting those elements, I hope to have preserved the integrity of composition as a whole while still culturing a pianistically idiomatic environment.

After playing through this many times, I can say you sure did~

My intention is not to brag about all these compliments, though it might seem like that. What I am trying to show is what those comments are based on, which is NOT how much material I shoved into an arrangement (I'm full-on disavowing the "include everything" style directly in my self-quote!), but HOW it was done.

To close, and to sound at least a little less salty, I really do appreciate you acknowledging the cleanliness of my engraving style. For me, being an arranger is but a means to practice engraving. One of my career aspirations is to be a freelance copyist for DAW-based composers who don't work in notation. So, while it would be nice to be acknowledged for my efforts in expanding my skill set as a sensible arranger, it isn't a core element of my musicianship. Even if this myth persists, I'm glad you see me for the important part -- fine dining and breathing clean engraving. Thank you.

[JDMEK5]

Finished another round of polishing. Should be up to my par now given I haven't overlooked anything.

[Latios212]

Some small aesthetic things:
- 43: extend the slur past the whole note? Coming into the Eb looks like a tie. Same with 39
- Flip tie in 47
- Two measure system at the end looks kinda eh. maybe bring one down from the previous system?
- The mid-measure key change messes up the measure numbering.