NinSheetMusic Forums

NinSheetMusic => Submission Center => Submission Archive => Topic started by: Zeta on March 22, 2017, 09:45:47 AM

Title: [DELETED] [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Zeta on March 22, 2017, 09:45:47 AM
Submission Information:

Series: The Legend of Zelda
Game: The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
Console: Wii U
Title: Lost Woods
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Olimar12345 (http://forum.ninsheetmusic.org/index.php?action=profile;u=83)
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on March 22, 2017, 09:46:46 AM
I'm sorry for this one:

Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Latios212 on March 22, 2017, 09:57:58 AM
oh gosh

do I need to check all these notes
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 07, 2017, 03:12:44 PM
Believe it or not, I checked the notes.
There may be some other errors but I'm not fully sure of those so I just mentioned these ones.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 07, 2017, 08:12:07 PM
I'll check the specific things next time I can, but as for the note head placement in those weird spots, if I place them on the other side of the stem they become misaligned with other notes happening at the same time. Of the two options, I think this one is easier to read.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 07, 2017, 11:04:36 PM
The problem with that this kind of notation is that it isn't used in music. If the misalignment is the main problem for you, just make those bars more spaced, or use a different way to write it (you don't need to write it this way after all).
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 08, 2017, 06:10:34 AM
I want everything to be beamed together in this piece. To me, it serves as a visual representation of the unity of the sound. In addition, since the two parts are echo-like, it makes it easier to read as opposed to having the player align the two parts without physical note stems keeping everything together. Is it non-traditional? Yes. However, I have not done this lightly, or without thought.

As mentioned in my previous post, there are three options for how to display this with the right hand and left hand beamed together. These are displayed below, numbered 1-3.

(http://i65.tinypic.com/x3u078.jpg)

Numbers 2 and 3 keep the standard notation placement tendencies for the stems and note heads, but have visual ambiguity. Number 2 aligns the note heads, which are intended to sound at the same time, but unless one is reading carefully, the stems create the illusion that the uppermost note is supposed to sound before the lower one. Number 3 solves this issue by keeping the stem in alignment through out both registers, but now the note heads are not aligned, resulting in a similar problem.

Number 1 combats both of the issues caused by the other two options. Though not a standard practice for music notation, it demands no second guessing as to when to play both notes.

At the end of the day, it is just "notation." Whether or not something is or isn't typically used in music notation is in itself not a law that music writers must abide by (graphic notation, anybody?). I doubt anyone would look at what I have now and question how the passage is supposed to be played.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 08:58:49 AM
Quote from: Olimar12345 on April 08, 2017, 06:10:34 AMAt the end of the day, it is just "notation." Whether or not something is or isn't typically used in music notation is in itself not a law that music writers must abide by (graphic notation, anybody?). I doubt anyone would look at what I have now and question how the passage is supposed to be played.
With this logic, you could even write a score using note names and writing what the rhythm is. Like a Lilypond file. No one would look at your score and question how it is supposed to be played (assuming he knows the note names and the note values), but that's not how a score is written. Your notation, even though it is clear, it's not used. If this score was handwritten, I could understand your point, but it's not, so you really should follow the standard notation rules. I would go with the 3rd version you show, which is clear enough in my opinion, since the fact that there's only a beam shouldn't really create doubts in anyone reading. But if the fact that the note heads is not aligned is really bothering you, you could also write in any of these 3 ways:
Spoiler
  • (http://i.imgur.com/W11LWzT.png) – the best way with the standard notation, the only thing you lose is the main beam between the 2 staffs, but that's only a graphic issue, and honestly I much prefer this graphic issue over the one in your score;
  • (http://i.imgur.com/4pNqCJR.png) – you gain alignment of the note heads, you have the alignments in the beams, the only thing you don't have is a single beam between rh and lh, but you can have it if you make the beam longer, like this:
    (http://i.imgur.com/nsfP83W.png), so that's a pretty good compromise I'd say, even though this is probably not standard notation either;
  • (http://i.imgur.com/HchQEN3.png) – I know you said that you want everything beamed together as a visual representation of the unity and whatever, but I don't agree with this concept anyway. Everything here is played staccato, and I feel like every chord here is like a single unity. In fact, there's no real harmony in this piece. Moreover, this notation is used even when it's not needed, for example in Alkan's concerto you can find this:
    (http://i.imgur.com/EddkwTv.png)
    Notice how the edition writes the first pauses, then it hides them. It's still pretty clear how this bar is supposed to be played, even hiding the pauses, since it's pretty clear that the bar is 3/4, and not 7/16. There was no need of using a single main beam between the staffs, even though the hands are clearly harmonically and melodically connected in this case.
[close]
Anyway, be sure to also check those bars I mentioned earlier.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 08, 2017, 01:09:50 PM
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 08:58:49 AMWith this logic, you could even write a score using note names and writing what the rhythm is. Like a Lilypond file.

At its core though, that is a form of music notation. Just like guitar tablature or (like I mentioned) graphic notation. It's just a visual representation of sound. These are all fine, but if we're getting back to piano notation for this website, my tiny backwards note head is hardly comparable to "a Lilypond file."

But enough of that (lol).
About your suggestions:
1. I don't like number one because one must retrace the stems all the way down (or up) to make sense of the rhythm. This was a nonissue in my method because stems did not go farther than the middle of the two staves.
2. This option looks disjunct and breaks the consistency that the connected stems offers. The second version of the option that you have is literally synonymous with how I have it now, with a second stem frivolously added. How is this more necessary again? Lol
3. This one probably makes the next most sense, but I still think it's more of a hassle to read compared to what I have right now. With the rests, the player is charged with lining up the notes and holes on their own. My version is literally this but simplified in that there are physical lines drawn to connect notes that sound at the same time. Why is this so bad?

Honestly,

Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 08:58:49 AMNo one would look at your score and question how it is supposed to be played...
This statement alone should dismiss the disagreement. The conversation at hand is one of opinions and preferences based on our own, different and separate personal experiences.


Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 08:58:49 AMAnyway, be sure to also check those bars I mentioned earlier.

Will do.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PM
Quote from: Olimar12345 on April 08, 2017, 01:09:50 PM2. This option looks disjunct and breaks the consistency that the connected stems offers. The second version of the option that you have is literally synonymous with how I have it now, with a second stem frivolously added. How is this more necessary again? Lol
The second version has the notes written at the right part of the stem. That "second stem frivolously added" makes that version a lot more correct than yours, in my opinion, since, as I said, this is not a manuscript, so we should follow the standard conventions of writing the notes at the left or the right of the stem depending on the direction of it, unless there are two adjacent notes (and that's literally the only case in which a note should be put on the other side of the stem). Your version is basically questioning the standard convention of writing the notes, even if you wrote it that way on some basis (which weren't convincing enough in my opinion). I mean, if you find the lilypond example so extreme, I could also tell you that I could make a score written this way, and it really wouldn't be so different with what you did with your submission:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/2DQU4sP.png) (yeah that's a canon in augmentation if you're wondering)
[close]
After all, the notes are clear, the rhythm is clear, I just decided to change the standard conventions. I could as well do this change on some basis, for example I could justify this change by saying that I saw this way of writing the notes in some manuscript (in which, by the way, you could actually find this kind of notation), and I think it's more clear when it's written this way. Of course that's just an example, I wouldn't really do that.
And that's basically what you're doing: you're changing the standard conventions, and you're justifying this change because you think it's more clear that way. But that still counts as a change. Your reasoning is too subjective in my opinion. You may as well be right on the clarity, even though I don't agree, but there are several alternatives without changing the rules. That's why I really think you should just use any of the ways the standard notation offers. The second one is the one that is more similar graphically, but it has the notes written at the right part of the stem, as I said, and it's really not that hard to write.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Dudeman on April 08, 2017, 02:50:02 PM
If I may weigh in: the way Olimar has these notated is odd, yes, but I agree with him that the way the notes are situated allows for easier reading of the note placement within the measure. Opening up the file for the first time now, I had no trouble at all recognizing that these dyads needed to be played together. In fact, I find the "backwards" notation of the right hand more of a help than a hindrance, as it serves as a visual reminder to the performer that there is an irregularity in the echo-like rhythm in that spot. At the end of the day, you are arguing over an ambiguous piece of visual formatting, and since Olimar is the arranger and deliberately notated those portions the way he did for emphasis, he should have the final say.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 08, 2017, 04:27:13 PM
Before I proceed with this unnecessarily long post, I would like to thank you for your interest here. Even though we disagree, it is a means to grow both of our understandings of the topic at hand.

Regarding the second version again:
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMThe second version has the notes written at the right part of the stem.
The first one does, yes. That is not in question.
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMThat "second stem frivolously added" makes that version a lot more correct than yours,
Stopping right here, the term "correct" is subjective, but I understand that the point you are trying to make is in regards to traditional notation practices. When I said a second stem was frivolous, I was referring to how you imply that downward stem is needed to "justify" this note's existence, while the one I prefer serves a useful purpose. I call the stem you added "frivolous" because you argue that it is needed in addition to what I have in order to legitimize it, rather than to serve an actual function.
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PM...in my opinion, since, as I said, this is not a manuscript, so we should follow the standard conventions of writing the notes at the left or the right of the stem depending on the direction of it...
Whoa whoa whoa, so if this were manuscript, the rules would be different? That seems not only inconsistent, but conflicting with "the rules." Your fixation on it needing to be manuscript in order to have "justification" seems narrow-minded, especially since I have legitimate reasons for the way I display these few instances that don't simply dependent on the medium that hosts it.
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMYour version is basically questioning the standard convention of writing the notes, even if you wrote it that way on some basis (which weren't convincing enough in my opinion).
Hang on there: this is only a special technique used in very specific and unique situations. I have made over 250 arrangements and this is the only one with a need for such a maneuver, so if anyone were going to be the harbinger of this new notation technique, it would not be me. I am in no way trying to dismantle the way music notations is supposed to look. Whether or not you find this one thing I did convincing is your opinion, but I usually function on the side of logic.
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMI mean, if you find the lilypond example so extreme, I could also tell you that I could make a score written this way, and it really wouldn't be so different with what you did with your submission:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/2DQU4sP.png) (yeah that's a canon in augmentation if you're wondering)
[close]
After all, the notes are clear, the rhythm is clear, I just decided to change the standard conventions.
Again, you are blowing this way out of proportion. The only time I have a backwards note head is when both notes are stemmed together, placed in opposing staves, have their beam between said staves, are preceded and followed by notes that are included in the beam, and sound simultaneously. If this was not the case, (i.e. 99.9999% of the time) I would be arguing on your side.
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMI could as well do this change on some basis, for example I could justify this change by saying that I saw this way of writing the notes in some manuscript (in which, by the way, you could actually find this kind of notation), and I think it's more clear when it's written this way. Of course that's just an example, I wouldn't really do that.
Still confused as to why it being in manuscript suddenly justifies this in your eyes.
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMAnd that's basically what you're doing: you're changing the standard conventions, and you're justifying this change because you think it's more clear that way. But that still counts as a change. Your reasoning is too subjective in my opinion. You may as well be right on the clarity, even though I don't agree, but there are several alternatives without changing the rules.
This is just rambling about things I've already addressed. Read my above comments. Since I have a free area here, I propose to you to think about how we notate the interval of a second. No matter which direction the stem goes, one of the pitches in the chord gets their note head flipped around the wrong way. With your argument here, is it considered incorrect for composers to write this interval without separate stems going in each direction, disregarding the individual circumstances?
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMThat's why I really think you should just use any of the ways the standard notation offers. The second one is the one that is more similar graphically, but it has the notes written at the right part of the stem, as I said
I've already addressed my opinion regarding the second option you offered, and why I feel it doesn't have as much to offer as the way I currently have.
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PMand it's really not that hard to write.
This has not been an argument on the difficulty of notating the passage. I always opt towards the way I feel is the clearest means of communication between the writer and performer, always at the expense of the writer's time. If there were another option that I felt did a better job at notation this passage, I would do that.

Quote from: Dudeman on April 08, 2017, 02:50:02 PMIf I may weigh in: the way Olimar has these notated is odd, yes, but I agree with him that the way the notes are situated allows for easier reading of the note placement within the measure. Opening up the file for the first time now, I had no trouble at all recognizing that these dyads needed to be played together. In fact, I find the "backwards" notation of the right hand more of a help than a hindrance, as it serves as a visual reminder to the performer that there is an irregularity in the echo-like rhythm in that spot. At the end of the day, you are arguing over an ambiguous piece of visual formatting, and since Olimar is the arranger and deliberately notated those portions the way he did for emphasis, he should have the final say.
Well said. Thank you, and thanks for taking a look at my arrangement.

Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 08:58:49 AMAnyway, be sure to also check those bars I mentioned earlier.

As promised:

Quote from: Pianoth on April 07, 2017, 03:12:44 PM
  • m18 Check the left hand. The rhythm should be like m11, with different notes in the left hand.
  • m31 Check the right hand.

-Measure 18: check again. You're hearing the louder sustain of the lower octave (hit harder in that measure) combined with the upper octave re-articulating on the up beat. The lower octave does not re-articulate it's chord in that spot. Slowing the recording down makes this apparent. If further convincing is needed, check out the spot where it returns down an octave in measure 52.
-Measure 31: Sorry, I'm not catching what is wrong in this measure.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: WaluigiTime64 on April 08, 2017, 04:47:29 PM
Quote from: Olimar12345 on April 08, 2017, 04:27:13 PMThere aren't many real boundaries in music notation, and almost anything can be sacrificed for clarity, within reason.
Is this the message behind that wall of text?
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 08, 2017, 05:04:05 PM
In a sense.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 09, 2017, 02:54:02 AM
I could answer and continue the discussion, since I still totally disagree, and I have other arguments, but I don't care so much. I respect your opinion even if I don't agree, and you're the editor of the score anyway (and this site isn't as serious as a professional music edition, and it shouldn't be anyway).
I was pretty sure of those corrections of the notes though: I suggest listening to 50% speed, lowering the octaves. I'm pretty sure I heard some pretty clear re-articulation, that couldn't just be caused by reverb or something (I even had doubts in other bars I didn't mention, these were just the ones in which I was sure that I would have written different notes). If, after re-listening again, you're still pretty sure of what you wrote, it's ok, there isn't too much difference anyway.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 09, 2017, 05:34:45 AM
Thanks for the reply. I know you're pretty tired of this discussion, but if you really do have "other arguments," I'd love to hear them. (I thought I was pretty on-point with my reply, especially in the bit about the interval of a second)
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 09, 2017, 03:56:50 PM
Quote from: Olimar12345 on April 09, 2017, 05:34:45 AMThanks for the reply. I know you're pretty tired of this discussion, but if you really do have "other arguments," I'd love to hear them. (I thought I was pretty on-point with my reply, especially in the bit about the interval of a second)
I currently don't have time to do a full answer, but if you really want to know at least what I think about the interval of a second, it's something I even wrote in my other post:
Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 02:23:19 PM[...] so we should follow the standard conventions of writing the notes at the left or the right of the stem depending on the direction of it, unless there are two adjacent notes (and that's literally the only case in which a note should be put on the other side of the stem).
Do you know why it's the only case? It's simply because we're forced to write those that way. If you write two adjacent notes at the same part of stem, you couldn't read clearly what the notes are. Especially if there are 3 adjacent notes: if you try to put the middle note on the same side of the other two, you will see that the middle note almost disappears, because it will be covered by the other notes. I don't have time to put images to show, but I think you got the idea.
So, if you're using the interval of a second as an example, it's not a convincing argument for me, since you're not forced at all to use that notation. In your case, you may not like them, but there are at least 5 alternatives without writing notes at the wrong part of the stem. But as I said, you're free to do whatever you want, I just don't agree with your decision since I don't find it necessary.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 09, 2017, 04:58:12 PM
I completely disagree, because we could write the interval of a second with two stems going outwards, in each direction. Or do you finally concede that having a second stem just to avoid a backwards note head is frivolous?
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 09, 2017, 11:41:41 PM
It's a completely different scenario, since there are already notes on the standard part of the stem, so, adding a second stem isn't necessary. Moreover, we're forced to write those like that, and we have established a pretty precise rule for it. In your scenario, instead, all the notes of the chord are on the other side of the stem, it's a completely different thing and for a completely different reason.

I'll also make you notice, anyway, that even if you add a second stem in a chord with adjacent notes, the notes of the chord still wouldn't be aligned. That's also why that case is completely different from yours.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Altissimo on April 10, 2017, 04:25:09 AM
tbh musical clarity should take precedence over musical notation convention

look at this (https://imslp.org/wiki/Menuet_antique_(Ravel,_Maurice)) piece for an example of what i mean, the beaming is very consistently nonsensical compared to tradition but it's done to emphasize the importance of phrasing and the like

if olimar wants his piece to be more musically clear than notationally standard i don't see the problem
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 10, 2017, 05:49:26 AM
Quote from: Altissimo on April 10, 2017, 04:25:09 AMlook at this (https://imslp.org/wiki/Menuet_antique_(Ravel,_Maurice)) piece for an example of what i mean, the beaming is very consistently nonsensical compared to tradition but it's done to emphasize the importance of phrasing and the like
Actually, I don't see anything strange in that score. I've seen scores with notations a lot more unconventional. The problem in this case, as I already said, is that I don't think that olimar's notation makes the piece musically or graphically more clear, compared to several other standard ways he could have used. But that's my opinion, you may as well disagree, I don't really care. I already accepted the fact the he isn't going to change the notation, he has the choice to do so.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 09:06:30 AM
(Just for the record, you never posted these "other arguments" (plural, as in more than one) that were in your favor here.) Anyway:
Quote from: Pianoth on April 10, 2017, 05:49:26 AMI don't think that olimar's notation makes the piece musically or graphically more clear, compared to several other standard ways he could have used.

Well now you're contradicting yourself:

Quote from: Pianoth on April 08, 2017, 08:58:49 AMNo one would look at your score and question how it is supposed to be played (assuming he knows the note names and the note values)

If no one would question how it is supposed to be played, isn't clarity achieved? Written communication between composer and performer is literally the only purpose for written notation. We don't write novels because we like the font they're written in, or the type of paper or binding; it's the story we read them for, and as long as we CAN read and interpret them, it shouldn't matter how they're written.



To expand upon what Altissimo brought up, lets take a quick look through an old music history textbook and see if we can't "break the rules" as you say.

We've got situations with what would normally be considered too-few beams used on eighth notes in 4/4,
Spoiler
(http://i68.tinypic.com/24muq0j.jpg)
Rachmaninoff, Prelude in G Minor, Op. 23 No. 5
[close]

and we've got instances where there are too many beams.
Spoiler
(http://i64.tinypic.com/1fahe1.jpg)
Ligeti, Etude No 9, Vertige
[close]

Both of these instances could have followed the common practices, but didn't.

We've got situations with what would normally be considered too many time changes and barlines,
Spoiler
(http://i64.tinypic.com/2uepmoh.jpg)
Stravinsky, The Rite of Spring
[close]

and we've got instances where there are too few time signatures and barlines.
Spoiler
(http://i63.tinypic.com/nf4buq.jpg)
Satie, Embryons desséchés: No. 3, de Podophthalma
[close]

Both of these instances could have followed the common practices, but didn't.

Then you've got my man, Charles Ives, who does all sorts of lovely things that probably make you uncomfortable. Here's one:
Spoiler
Notice those two half notes beamed together to signify their simultaneous sounding, under "Lamb."
(http://i66.tinypic.com/wmch.jpg)
Ives, General William Booth Enters into Heaven
[close]



Regarding the analogy of the second:

Quote from: Pianoth on April 09, 2017, 11:41:41 PMIt's a completely different scenario, since there are already notes on the standard part of the stem, so, adding a second stem isn't necessary. Moreover, we're forced to write those like that, and we have established a pretty precise rule for it. In your scenario, instead, all the notes of the chord are on the other side of the stem, it's a completely different thing and for a completely different reason.

The point we're arguing here is that with the second part of your second suggestion, there was simply an added stem that you claimed justified it (so long as it wasn't manuscript  ::) ). The second interval analogy I used was in this way:

(http://i66.tinypic.com/2ldf7uo.png)

Similar to how my excerpt has a backwards note head, so does A when written as such. Ignore the fact that this is already common practice for the sake of the analogy. If we implement your idea seen in the second picture of your second suggestion, we get B. Now both note heads have a stem that can justify it's existence in both directions. Now, as you already know, we don't write B all the time, we write A. We don't need the stem in B because we know what A wants to sound like. The second stem in B is unnecessary.



I'll close in saying this: Music is constantly contradicting itself, and we have to learn how to escape the imaginary box of "rules" that we grow up learning once we understand their purpose and importance. Why you continue to argue in the favor of making this more difficult to read in order to adhere to a "norm," while simultaneously agreeing with me that the method I have used would cause no confusion for the reader, shows that the purpose of music notation is still completely unknown to you.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: SlowPokemon on April 10, 2017, 10:07:22 AM
this is such a petty argument

and that's coming from me
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Bespinben on April 10, 2017, 10:37:52 AM
Ya know, just maybe, some people care about notation. It's this dismissiveness towards discussion of notation that gives modern composers a bad rap. But hey, on the bright side, it's also why professional copyists and engravers can still exist in the era of digital music, so thanks for keeping me employed. I for one have quite enjoyed following this discussion, but it seems those intent on prioritizing PR over our craft do not. Thank you Olimar for defending your choices; thank you Pianoth for questioning them; screw off social justice bystanders.

Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Altissimo on April 10, 2017, 11:01:58 AM
Quote from: Bespinben on April 10, 2017, 10:37:52 AMI for one have quite enjoyed following this discussion, but it seems those intent on prioritizing PR over our craft do not.
[...]
screw off social justice bystanders.

who are these lmao
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Dudeman on April 10, 2017, 11:18:41 AM
Quote from: Altissimo on April 10, 2017, 11:01:58 AMwho are these lmao
...I was wondering the same thing, honestly.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 11:31:10 AM
Quote from: SlowPokemon on April 10, 2017, 10:07:22 AMand that's coming from me

Lol, what's this supposed to mean?
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 10, 2017, 12:21:34 PM
I just don't have time to do long answers at the moment, that's why I haven't explained much yet. I'm really busy, at least until Thursday, because of a masterclass on composing music for TV and cinema. Also consider this fact in this answer. I'll try to be as synthetic as I can:
Now, because of this answer, I'll be forced to sleep less, basically. Now that's frivolous. I won't even bother answering to this discussion anymore, you're free to do and think whatever you want.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: SlowPokemon on April 10, 2017, 12:30:26 PM
Quote from: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 11:31:10 AMLol, what's this supposed to mean?

I'm a petty bitch

Quote from: Bespinben on April 10, 2017, 10:37:52 AMYa know, just maybe, some people care about notation. It's this dismissiveness towards discussion of notation that gives modern composers a bad rap. But hey, on the bright side, it's also why professional copyists and engravers can still exist in the era of digital music, so thanks for keeping me employed. I for one have quite enjoyed following this discussion, but it seems those intent on prioritizing PR over our craft do not. Thank you Olimar for defending your choices; thank you Pianoth for questioning them; screw off social justice bystanders.

Calling each other stupid over notation preferences is really petty
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Dudeman on April 10, 2017, 12:34:22 PM
...could we, like, get back to accepting the sheet, maybe? It's really great.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 01:16:05 PM
Quote from: SlowPokemon on April 10, 2017, 12:30:26 PMI'm just kind of here.
Spoiler
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CZixuvaWIAAvrYM.jpg)
[close]

Well Pianoth, this was fun. I'll make a quick final reply to your post (which you may not even read!) but it's clear here that we come from different musical backgrounds and have different sets of ideologies.

1. I still think mine is clearer than any of the other options you gave, but thanks for posting them!
2. Well, I meant read and comprehend the musical meaning behind the technique. This is such a minuscule thing to textwall over, since regardless of whichever way we wrote that passage, it would still be understood.
3. Noooooo I didn't mean for you to have to post all of that! I was just taking tid-bits of things that you don't usually see or that you could rewrite in more standard ways to fit this discussion. I was not posting "hey, lets analyze all of these rn okay go!" I thought that was apparent from the beginning, lol. Also, say what you want about that Ives excerpt, I guarantee that you won't find that technique used anywhere else. (Now if we're talking about our own compositions, I've done some pretty neat things, too. One that comes to mind was a three part fugue that I wrote using twelve-tone technique, but we can talk personal works elsewhere!)
4. I know what you were suggesting, I was just using the ends to justify the means. Even if you added the second stem after the downward stem, you would still be left with two stems on a single note, not to mention, the order in which you add the stems cannot be determined from the end product! xD
5. I think you misread the quote in this fifth spot; I was not asking a question, lol. There was a musical reason I did it this way, but with how long our posts have been I can forgive you for overlooking it.

Cheers!

Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 10, 2017, 01:32:51 PM
Quote from: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 01:16:05 PMwhich you may not even read!
I saw you were online and you were "posting", so it wouldn't be kind to ignore it. Today I even showed your score to a friend of mine, which is a composer too. He also thought those chords were strange. So it's not like I'm the only one thinking that :P (you may as well not believing me, since I can't provide proof, but I can assure you I wouldn't say this randomly if it didn't happen) Anyway, I found that last part, "the purpose of music notation is still completely unknown to you", kinda offensive, since I always make sure my scores are as good as possible in every possible way. So, sorry if my answer wasn't as kind as possible.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 01:47:25 PM
Quote from: Pianoth on April 10, 2017, 01:32:51 PMToday I even showed your score to a friend of mine, which is a composer too. He also thought those chords were strange. So it's not like I'm the only one thinking that

Of course it looks strange! That's kind of the whole debate here! lol I totally agree that it looks odd and that it will raise an eyebrow or two, but for the purpose of keeping as many things in alignment as possible and to preserve the mood of the piece, (which I have explained now every which way to Sunday!) through my training in composition and theory, it is in my opinion that anyway (that I have seen thus far or can imagine) but how I have it now would break the consistency that the piece is built upon.

Quote from: Pianoth on April 10, 2017, 01:32:51 PMAnyway, I found that last part, "the purpose of music notation is still completely unknown to you", kinda offensive, since I always make sure my scores are as good as possible in every possible way. So, sorry if my answer wasn't as kind as possible.

I'm sorry if this offended you. However, I'm still not quite convinced the message in that paragraph got across...
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Bespinben on April 10, 2017, 02:11:33 PM
Since Olimar seems to be enjoying this, I'll pick up where the train left off. I feel this quote has a lot of wisdom:
Quote from: Pianoth on April 07, 2017, 11:04:36 PMor use a different way to write it (you don't need to write it this way after all).

There's always a myriad of ways to express a thought, and sometimes you have to make a sacrifice of what you want communicate artistically for the sake of aesthetics (a blasphemous thought, but hear me out). Using cross-staff notation for the sake of visually representing the unity of parts works, but I feel that same notion is expressed (albeit less deliberately) with split voicings in the same staff:

(https://www.dropbox.com/s/0htwvmp8p60ws1l/practicality.PNG?dl=1)

I feel this notation best overcomes the challenge faced at measure 3, and others like it. I don't feel this notation is ideal (ex: to hide or not hide rests; to beam or not beam; 8ths or 16ths?) but perhaps this is a step in a better direction. Don't get so hung up on doing things one way that you don't experiment with all the possibilities.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 02:20:02 PM
The issue with doing this in one staff arises at the bottom of the first page though, when the LH moves to the bass clef. Now a change in staves becomes necessary (well, it avoids more ledger lines, at least). This is why I had separate staves for each hand in use from the beginning: so that it would be more consistent throughout. (since the second page is just a repeat of the first page, but down the octave in the LH and with slightly different inversions).

Quote from: Bespinben on April 10, 2017, 02:11:33 PMDon't get so hung up on doing things one way that you don't experiment with all the possibilities.

I know it wasn't said anywhere, but there most definitely was a period of experimentation in writing this transcription, in which I had a version that looked similar to your example, and one that looked similar to one of Pianoth's examples. I just ultimately decided to use the one you see in the op.

Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: mikey on April 10, 2017, 05:09:04 PM
Quote from: Bespinben on April 10, 2017, 10:37:52 AMYa know, just maybe, some people care about notation. It's this dismissiveness towards discussion of notation that gives modern composers a bad rap. But hey, on the bright side, it's also why professional copyists and engravers can still exist in the era of digital music, so thanks for keeping me employed. I for one have quite enjoyed following this discussion, but it seems those intent on prioritizing PR over our craft do not. Thank you Olimar for defending your choices; thank you Pianoth for questioning them; screw off social justice bystanders.


for those of you who don't speak Ben:

If you're not here to discuss notation shove off
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 11, 2017, 02:45:54 AM
Actually, I think Bespinben's idea is also really nice. The lower note you wrote in the piece can be written in the treble clef with only 2 ledger lines, and you're already using 4 ledger lines in the beginning for the higher notes. So, I don't see how this can be a problem for you. You could literally write the entire piece using only one staff. I can even give you an example in which something similar is done:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/oSWujoG.png)
That's from Marc-André Hamelin's fifth etude. Notice how the last bar in the image totally avoids any problem. Also notice that the presence of ledger lines isn't really a problem.
[close]
If you really don't want to change your score it's fine anyway.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Latios212 on April 11, 2017, 08:04:59 AM
Quote from: Pianoth on April 11, 2017, 02:45:54 AMActually, I think Bespinben's idea is also really nice. The lower note you wrote in the piece can be written in the treble clef with only 2 ledger lines, and you're already using 4 ledger lines in the beginning for the higher notes. So, I don't see how this can be a problem for you. You could literally write the entire piece using only one staff.

This:
Quote from: Olimar12345 on April 10, 2017, 02:20:02 PMThe issue with doing this in one staff arises at the bottom of the first page though, when the LH moves to the bass clef. Now a change in staves becomes necessary (well, it avoids more ledger lines, at least). This is why I had separate staves for each hand in use from the beginning: so that it would be more consistent throughout. (since the second page is just a repeat of the first page, but down the octave in the LH and with slightly different inversions).

I know it wasn't said anywhere, but there most definitely was a period of experimentation in writing this transcription, in which I had a version that looked similar to your example, and one that looked similar to one of Pianoth's examples. I just ultimately decided to use the one you see in the op.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Pianoth on April 11, 2017, 08:13:59 AM
I've read what Olimar wrote, that was my opinion on the argument: I think it wouldn't be a problem writing the whole piece in one staff, I don't see why a change in staves would be necessary. Just my opinion.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 11, 2017, 09:33:16 AM
Yeah Latios, he's right. I didn't realize it until after I posted, but it only goes down to a G, and like Pianoth said, it's already using more ledger lines in the opposite direction. This is definitely a solid option.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 15, 2017, 08:43:46 PM
Updated the file with the following changes:
-Time signatures now reflect the pattern starting with the wider intervals (in most cases) rather than just being syncopated throughout.
-Note stems throughout have been meticulously realigned to make it easier on the eyes.
-Many tiny nuisance have been cleaned up.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: mastersuperfan on April 15, 2017, 09:17:15 PM
Well, I think I went through a whole bag of popcorn while reading that.

Anyways, my suggestion would be to have it more widely spaced so that the systems fill up the third page completely. It's pretty cramped right now, and I'm finding it difficult to understand what's going on in some measures without squinting.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 15, 2017, 09:23:03 PM
There are only two pages. View the PDF.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: mastersuperfan on April 16, 2017, 09:00:26 AM
The MUS has three. Finale export issue?
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 16, 2017, 10:18:43 AM
It's your version. Works well in 12.
I'll see what I can do later.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 17, 2017, 04:00:28 PM
Try opening it now.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: mastersuperfan on April 17, 2017, 05:12:27 PM
Yep, two pages now.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Bespinben on April 22, 2017, 01:39:40 AM
Honestly, if you're waiting for someone to endorse your notational choices, I don't think you're going to find it, at least, not within the circle of those who are conscientious of such things. I'm sure there's plenty here that are of a mindset that would acquiesce what you've presented for the sake of practicality, for the sake of NSM... and it is to those to whom I say go ahead and accept Olimar's sheet. Even after enduring criticism, he went further beyond and added precise time signatures to represent metric accents, painstakingly realigned note stems, and much more. Obviously the NSM standard has been met and exceeded manifold.

And yet... a polished terd is still a terd. But Ben isn't that a subjective judgement, based solely on personal aesthetics? Absolutely. However, if we can't agree on something as basic as recognizing that this is a highly functional, highly precise, highly academically informed piece of shit, then I'm afraid we have very little room to discuss much else in the realm of engraving, at least, as far as this composition is concerned.

You don't have to have 20/20 vision, years of experience as a player/composer/arranger/conductor, or collegiate training to notice the cramped the horizontal spacing that plagues this sheet. You don't have to have stacks of academic sources to see the un-intuitiveness of cross-staff backwards noteheads (as the definition of intuitive would dictate). Oh, but we're artists, so we can say that cramped spacing represents the claustrophobic mood of the piece, that it's some sort of daring, avant-garde non-traditional evolution of notation. No, it's not. It's just ugly.

Pushing the bounds of notation and conforming with public reception is always a balancing act. Sometimes you have to concede, sometimes you got to be a trailblazer, and sometimes (and by this I mean all the time) you have to just use common sense.

Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 22, 2017, 06:21:56 AM
Ben, you have this lovely gift in that you can create a well written post with the message either shrouded or not there. xD I think I've read it about six times now and I still am not sure what you're trying to say with it. Here's a response, but sorry if it sounds like it doesn't make sense to you:

It was not mentioned (because I didn't feel it was necessary), but I actually have been trying out the suggestions here. I still have some screenshots from a few of the last ones:

Spoiler
(http://i64.tinypic.com/2z54ua1.jpg)
(http://i68.tinypic.com/5vy845.jpg)

One big problem that arrises from these methods though, is the fact that the syncopated rhythms rely on empty space in order to convey rhythmic accuracy (especially something that is "plagued with cramped horizontal spacing"). There are other things, (no need to beat a dead horse) but the point here is that I wasn't just blowing off the suggestions posted here.
[close]

No method presented here exists without its consequences. The ideology I have been taught and will stand by is that when the going gets tough, sacrifice notational norms for the sake of the reader. The way I have chosen to notate this does this, I believe. You have great reasons for not liking some of the choices I've made. I have great reasons for the choices I've made. We disagree, and that's okay.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Latios212 on April 22, 2017, 01:39:58 PM
I may as well leave my opinion here for what it's worth, as I just tried playing the sheet for the first time. Sorry if I'm beating a dead horse, but I don't think anyone's mentioned the last point I'm about to bring up.
~ Horizontal spacing - I've thought about it and I'm still not quite sure why you're complaining, Ben, haha.
~ Reverse stems - Counterintuitive, yes, but I can understand the reasoning behind it. Doesn't cause any problems reading the notes or rhythms, so I'm good with it.
~ Here's my only real gripe about this sheet - it's the amount of vertical space between the right hand and left hand parts on the page. I think it's nicer to visually put parts closer together where the hands are closer, but anyway the reason I bring this up is the amount of visual zig-zagging the performer needs to do in order to read the piece at any sort of tempo. Quickly switching between the top and bottom staffs for every sixteenth note seems a bit tiring, and that's the reason I prefer the above single-staff methods - they make it much easier to read the actual notes. In my opinion, the separation between staves impedes the ease of readability more than the odd rhythms and stems do. I don't think the single-staff solutions make interpreting the rhythm any more difficult - the measures are all short enough to easily tell what's going on. At least, that's what I think.

Oh, and there's a stray staccato in m. 7.
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Bespinben on April 22, 2017, 05:03:38 PM
My complaints are purely aesthetic. As Latios' experiments show, the subject of my objections (namely, spacing and the entirety of the cross-staving scheme) are functional, something I fully admitted in my previous post. The results of said experiment do not necessarily negate my objections (Latios: "I don't see why you're complaining, Ben"), but it does show that what significantly bothers me visually may only be a minor nuisance to someone else. That said, I would expect that Olimar would be very open to consider Latios' newest point in favor of a one-staff solution, as it is an observation based on function, rather than "me no likey".
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: cashwarrior1 on April 22, 2017, 05:22:01 PM
Seems good to me!  ;D
Title: Re: [WiiU] The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild - "Lost Woods" by Olimar12345
Post by: Olimar12345 on April 24, 2017, 09:28:44 AM
Thanks, Latios. I think I'm going to retire this for now, though. It'll come back on a future update.