[SNES] Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest - "In a Snow-Bound Land" (Replacement) by Yug Guy

[Zeta]

Submission Information:
Series: Donkey Kong
Game: Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest
Console: Super Nintendo Entertainment System
Title: In a Snow-Bound Land
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Yug Guy


Replacement Information:
Links to Existing Sheet: MUS | MIDI | PDF
Replacement Type: Challenge (new arranger)

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Yug_Guy]

Correct title is "In a Snow-Bound Land"

[Sebastian]

Oi. I love this song. David Wise and Grant Kirkhope in my opinion are some of the best.

Some feedback:
- The only big issue I see with this sheet are the places where you essentially need three hands to play it.
For example, places like M. 9, 11, 13, etc. Here is an example of how you could solve this issue:

Spoiler

[close]

This would keep all three voices, but make it playable. The places I see this issue is throughout M. 9-24.
- I noticed you inverted/changed some of the chords...probably to accommodate for the playability issue. I would use the above method to solve the issue and then change the chords back to their correct inversions found in the original (the chords from M. 9-24).
- If you want, you could totally get rid of M. 41-46 and have M. 40 repeat back to M. 3.
- I would recommend some system re-arranging (especially if you take out those measures) and some formatting fine-tuning. This will give the systems some more breathing room. Also, the page 2 symbol is really close to the M. 16 symbol.
- The notes look good. Once again, I would invert the chords in M. 25-38 (some are correct already).

Nice work!

[Maelstrom]

Oh no a .tk file. Kill it with fire.

Also, I fixed the title.

[Yug_Guy]

- The only big issue I see with this sheet are the places where you essentially need three hands to play it.
For example, places like M. 9, 11, 13, etc. Here is an example of how you could solve this issue:

Spoiler

[close]

This would keep all three voices, but make it playable. The places I see this issue is throughout M. 9-24.

While I like this idea I have one gripe with it: while it solves the playability of the piece, it completely slows down any forward momentum it had up to that point. Do you think maybe only having an eighth rest instead of a quarter rest would be okay, or would it still be as bad as it is now?

- I would recommend some system re-arranging (especially if you take out those measures) and some formatting fine-tuning. This will give the systems some more breathing room.

Are you sure? It looks pretty good to me. The only issue I can see would have been the very last system, but that's since been deleted.

- The notes look good. Once again, I would invert the chords in M. 25-38 (some are correct already).

Are they not in the correct inversion? I thought I had them in the correct inversion.

[Sebastian]

While I like this idea I have one gripe with it: while it solves the playability of the piece, it completely slows down any forward momentum it had up to that point. Do you think maybe only having an eighth rest instead of a quarter rest would be okay, or would it still be as bad as it is now?

Having an eighth rest would be a significantly fast jump, but it really depends on how difficult you would like it.

Are you sure? It looks pretty good to me. The only issue I can see would have been the very last system, but that's since been deleted.

Looks much better now that you updated the last page.

Are they not in the correct inversion? I thought I had them in the correct inversion.

If I recall correctly, there were a few wrong inversions. I'll check it out when I get a chance.

[Yug_Guy]

Having an eighth rest would be a significantly fast jump, but it really depends on how difficult you would like it.

For me personally, I would definitely prefer accuracy to the source than playability, so I'd probably go with the eighth note. But that's why I get a second opinion, in case I do something stupid or confusing - you guys can point that stuff out to me.

Looks much better now that you updated the last page.

Okay, cool. Glad that's settled.

If I recall correctly, there were a few wrong inversions. I'll check it out when I get a chance.

I wait with bated breath.

[Sebastian]

I wait with bated breath.

So, major brain fart. The inversions you had were correct. I was the one in the wrong there lol. Piece of advice: Don't note check without a piano/digital keyboard. xD
Anyway, yes. Your notes and inversions are correct.

For me personally, I would definitely prefer accuracy to the source than playability, so I'd probably go with the eighth note. But that's why I get a second opinion, in case I do something stupid or confusing - you guys can point that stuff out to me.
Okay, cool. Glad that's settled.
I wait with bated breath.

That sounds good! Go ahead and change that to what I have in the screenshot I provided, but with an eighth rest instead of a quarter, and your sheet should be ready to go.
EDIT: Pages 2 & 3 need playability adjusted as well.

Aaaaalso, flip the tie notes in M. 22 (first two beats).

Get these two things and this sheet is good to go.

[Yug_Guy]

So, major brain fart. The inversions you had were correct. I was the one in the wrong there lol. Piece of advice: Don't note check without a piano/digital keyboard. xD

Okay, cool. Glad that's settled

 

That sounds good! Go ahead and change that to what I have in the screenshot I provided, but with an eighth rest instead of a quarter, and your sheet should be ready to go.
Pages 2 & 3 need playability adjusted as well.
Aaaaalso, flip the tie notes in M. 22 (first two beats).
Get these two things and this sheet is good to go.

Done. Should be good to go!

[mastersuperfan]

This sounds beautiful <3

Just a few notes:

• Very nitpicky, but the tempo is closer to 104 BPM than 105 (it's about a 104.3, actually).
• I don't imagine that you would need the left hand to play those whole notes in m17-23, so you could probably revert those ones to how you had it originally.
• For the first beat of m25, m26, m29, and m30, though, you would need the left hand to play those Layer 2 notes. Or an alternative way to make those playable.
• While it's most certainly already implied, a "con pedale" marking wouldn't hurt. Not required, though.
• Another small nitpick: the "mp" marking in m40 is touching the bar line; I think it'd look a little cleaner if you moved it to the right a bit.
• One last thought: the "L.H." notation is a little vague, since it's hard to tell whether the left hand should be playing just the bottom note, or the whole chord, etc. I wonder if it would be helpful to insert brackets in between the notes of the chords to specify which notes specifically should be played by the L.H, because playing the whole chord with the L.H. every time isn't very convenient. At the same time, though, the notes are pretty close together, and that might end up messy-looking, and the pianist would probably be able to figure out how they would best play it by themselves. Just an idea for consideration, but nothing necessary.

[Yug_Guy]

• While it's most certainly already implied, a "con pedale" marking wouldn't hurt. Not required, though.

I know, but it's probably fine just the way it is right now.

• I don't imagine that you would need the left hand to play those whole notes in m17-23, so you could probably revert those ones to how you had it originally.
• One last thought: the "L.H." notation is a little vague, since it's hard to tell whether the left hand should be playing just the bottom note, or the whole chord, etc. I wonder if it would be helpful to insert brackets in between the notes of the chords to specify which notes specifically should be played by the L.H, because playing the whole chord with the L.H. every time isn't very convenient. At the same time, though, the notes are pretty close together, and that might end up messy-looking, and the pianist would probably be able to figure out how they would best play it by themselves. Just an idea for consideration, but nothing necessary.

I get it, but I've already gone through and changed it at an updater's request, and I really don't want to have to change it back again. Updaters, can we please get a consensus on what needs to be done here?

• Very nitpicky, but the tempo is closer to 104 BPM than 105 (it's about a 104.3, actually).
• Another small nitpick: the "mp" marking in m40 is touching the bar line; I think it'd look a little cleaner if you moved it to the right a bit.

Updated on my own personal copy - I'll update the OP with these changes once we get everything else settled.

[Sebastian]

I get it, but I've already gone through and changed it at an updater's request, and I really don't want to have to change it back again. Updaters, can we please get a consensus on what needs to be done here?

I believe there was a communication error on my part. Sorry! M. 17-24 doesn't need the LH. I didn't clarify that. My bad.
Originally, I was talking about M. 25-38 (the dyads); however, I believe the right hand can play the dyads and melody since they don't exceed a tenth interval. Most of the time, tenths are fine in sheets on NSM, especially "minor tenths" (M. 25, for example). You could put rolls in, but anyone playing them with hands small enough that they are unable to reach them would roll them anyway.

[mastersuperfan]

I just want to mention that a tenth between a white and a black key is significantly more difficult than a tenth between two white keys--and a ninth between two white keys is still very difficult if there's a black key in the middle. Feel free to leave it as it is now, but I would imagine that, more often than not, the pianist would have to roll some of these chords. If you'd prefer that over using the left hand, then the notation you have right now is fine.

[Yug_Guy]

I believe there was a communication error on my part. Sorry! M. 17-24 doesn't need the LH. I didn't clarify that. My bad.
Originally, I was talking about M. 25-38 (the dyads); however, I believe the right hand can play the dyads and melody since they don't exceed a tenth interval. Most of the time, tenths are fine in sheets on NSM, especially "minor tenths" (M. 25, for example). You could put rolls in, but anyone playing them with hands small enough that they are unable to reach them would roll them anyway.

Alright, thanks for letting me know.

I just want to mention that a tenth between a white and a black key is significantly more difficult than a tenth between two white keys--and a ninth between two white keys is still very difficult if there's a black key in the middle. Feel free to leave it as it is now, but I would imagine that, more often than not, the pianist would have to roll some of these chords. If you'd prefer that over using the left hand, then the notation you have right now is fine.

Yeah, I prefer the way I have it now. But thanks for the suggestion(s)!

Files updated

[Static]

Regarding those dyads in m25-38, I think the best option there would be to move most of them up one chord tone. For example, in m25-26, make the dyads B-D instead of G-B. This way you can get more notes of the chord instead of just the root and 3rd. Plus, it has a more full sound and is a lot easier to play instead of constantly rolling large intervals.