News:

Local man invests life savings into turnips. When asked whether it was a wise decision he responded, "Eh. I'm sure someone will buy them."

Main Menu

[SNES] Final Fantasy VI - "Dancing Mad" by Maelstrom

Started by Zeta, July 13, 2017, 08:54:00 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Zeta

Submission Information:

Series: Final Fantasy
Game: Final Fantasy VI
Console: Super Nintendo Entertainment System
Title: Dancing Mad
Instrumentation Solo Piano
Arranger: Maelstrom

[attachment deleted by admin]

Maelstrom

It's that time again. Updated with suggestions from Pianoth (finally).

Zeila

It's really impressive, nice work! Is there a reason why you didn't flip beat 1 of m78 though? Or at least unhide the rest?

Also, the DS al Coda marking is colliding with the Coda symbol. And if you really want to be picky, you could align some of the dynamic markings/expressions in places like m76 and 78 or m121 and 122 so that they're parallel with each other

daj

I love this track, and I think you've done a pretty nice arrangement of it. It's really complex, yeah, but your transcription was spot on, you chose mostly the right parts (my tastes gravitate towards choosing rhythms over melodies, but it's a personal thing ^^), and I'll have you know I did a full listening of the track today using your sheet as reference. Great stuff! :)

I'll try not to comment on the arrangement decisions - rather I think I'll focus on the...well, accidentals. xD Because that's all I ever do on NSM I suppose :p

~

b. 63, bt 3:
Consider changing the C-naturals to B-sharps.

This better highlights the leading-to-tonic relation between this chord and the opening chord of bar 64. I think B-sharp is easier to read because it makes more sense when you read it horizontally, but if you're a vertical reader then C-natural is easier. So this is still your call ^^

Same applies to bar 65, bt 3 - take your pick :)

~

b. 79:
Choose either G-flat or F-sharp for your diminished chords, keep it consistent.

There's no hard-and-fast rule to writing diminished chords, but doing this minimises the number of accidentals used and indicates to the performer that you're basically playing the same chord. So yeah :)

~

b. 81, bt 4:
Consider using C-flat over B-natural.

If you chose G-flat over F-sharp, then you're choosing a flat mode over a sharp mode - so keep it consistent. This better shows the movement from C-flat to D-flat too. ^^ If you'd like the nerdy part, this G-flat sus4 chord should be seen as a chromatic alteration of the C minor chord, so the C-flat is a chromatic alteration of C-natural~

Similar idea for b. 82, bt 4 (either F-sharp or all flats), b. 83, bt 3 (clashing F-flat and F-nat), b. 85, bt 2 (all flats here, show the melodic motion). b. 84, bt 4 is a really good example, because that is a clearly-written chromatic alteration. ^^ b. 85, bt 3 is another good example :)

~

b. 118-119 progression:
It is reeeaaaally unusual to have a fully-sharped chord to move to a fully-flatted chord, so consider changing the cord at 118 to an E-flat chord rather than a D-sharp chord.

The explanation: full-sharp to full-flat is step motion, while a change on the same note is usually chromatic motion. In this case, we call this an enharmonic modulation - change a chord on the same note to the enharmonic equivalent, then use it as a pivot. So it makes theoretical sense to change the spelling of that final chord ^^

~

b. 131-148:
You can write this section without flats! ^^ And most naturals. Hehe.

If it's a C-natural, it's actually a B-sharp - all C-nats in this section progress to C-sharps, and it's crucial to show this 7-1 relationship.

The B-flats are A-sharps in the context of C-sharp minor, buuuut it's a chromatic scale so hmm. Not too picky on that.

G-nats are okay though - they are diminished alterations of the dominant ^^

~

final section:
The natural-to-sharp movements - change the naturals to double-sharps ^^

Because 7-1! ^^

~

Lots of minor nitpicks with lots of nerdism, haha! :p Hope this makes sense ^^

And thank you for this sheet! I might consider picking this up in the future - if I do I will come back to this arrangement with playability considerations~

Cheers! ^^

Maelstrom

Oops. I really should have mentioned that Static and I are working on an updated version right now. Feedback should maybe be saved until it's done

Maelstrom

It has been updated and is now ready for feedback

daj

Nice! Love the way you organised it. And hey, you fixed the accidentals! ;D

Mm, one issue - the naming of your second and third movements. :p There are historically-established conventions that are expected when you name movements like that, so that makes it really dangerous to do so. If I try really hard to justify it, I guess you could call the second movement a scherzo - but the third movement is definitely not a fugue.

I suppose it's undeniable that the third movement emulates Baroque-era organ music, but that's a style - the fugue is a structural model. I analysed the movement and Googled "dancing mad fugue" online (p.s. the analysis on destructoid is bogus), and I'm now completely convinced this is not a fugue. I think the most appropriate name is "toccata", because that's more virtuosic and free-form. Do consider ^^

Since I'm on the topic, a "scherzo" is conventionally blazingly fast, such that you can feel the pulse in bars rather than beats. The reason why I'm still inclined to defend this as a scherzo is the section at bar 33 - that is very distinctive of a scherzo. The section afterwards, though, is definitely not. But you still can't call this a "fantasia", because that's usually a standalone work. So I don't really know what a good name for this section would be.

Actually, is there a need to name the movements? :p You could just label them by number, right? I think that would make things a lot less irky ^^

The Deku Trombonist

A couple of thoughts on the Finale:

-The snare drum is used in this section to highlight offbeats. So with that in mind (aside from it just fitting better, to my ear) bars 16 and 18 are 2-2-3.
-Wouldn't bar 24 be better in 6/8?
-Bar 25 should be grouped 3-2-2. It's highlighted in the drums.  Or better still, make 24 and 25 a 9/8 bar followed by a 2/4 bar.
-And again at 29, I'd put 3-2-2. And I'd put 3-2-3 at bar 30, because it's just like the 7/8 bar before but with a little hiccup at the end.

Static

When I was working with Maelstrom, I came up with the idea of adding those old-fashioned movement names because I was too focused on what this piece is inspired by instead of what it actually is. I got a way too carried away with the pseudo-classical-esque stuff in this song and I added titles without stopping to really think what they meant. I apologize for this, and those misleading titles have been removed. The time signatures and beaming have been fixed in Movement IV as well.

mastersuperfan

Quote from: NocturneOfShadow on February 11, 2016, 03:00:36 PMthere's also a huge difference in quality between 2000 songs and 2010 songs
Quote from: Latios212 on February 11, 2016, 03:29:24 PMThe difference between 2000 songs and 2010 songs is 10 songs.

Latios212

Quote from: Deku Trombonist on July 16, 2017, 05:42:36 AMA couple of thoughts on the Finale:

-The snare drum is used in this section to highlight offbeats. So with that in mind (aside from it just fitting better, to my ear) bars 16 and 18 are 2-2-3.
-... Or better still, make 24 and 25 a 9/8 bar followed by a 2/4 bar.
I might be a little confused because I have a version with maybe updated numbering. But for what is currently measures 15-16 of movement IV, the bass screams (7+8)/8 instead of (8+7)/8. Similar to how m. 29-30 is (7+8)/8, with the bass of the second bar being the same as the first with an extra note. I can't really say for certain, though, since the right hand does seem to imply (8+7)/8 a bit.

But m. 24-25 really feels wrong to me the way it is now. This to me seems much more fitting:

3/4+7/8
You cannot view this attachment.
[close]
My arrangements and YouTube channel!

Quote from: Dudeman on February 22, 2016, 10:16:37 AM
who needs education when you can have WAIFUS!!!!!

Spoiler
[close]
turtle

The Deku Trombonist

Quote from: Latios212 on August 08, 2017, 10:42:10 PMI might be a little confused because I have a version with maybe updated numbering. But for what is currently measures 15-16 of movement IV, the bass screams (7+8)/8 instead of (8+7)/8. Similar to how m. 29-30 is (7+8)/8, with the bass of the second bar being the same as the first with an extra note. I can't really say for certain, though, since the right hand does seem to imply (8+7)/8 a bit.
Interesting pick up. The drums and bass definitely outline that rhythmic structure, but as you pointed out the melody throws it off somewhat. I can see it on the page but I can't really hear it.

Quote from: Latios212 on August 08, 2017, 10:42:10 PMBut m. 24-25 really feels wrong to me the way it is now. This to me seems much more fitting:
Yeah the way it is was just an idea I had, I don't like it either since looking at it on paper. 6/8 + 7/8 though, not 3/4 + 7/8.

Also, fix the beaming in the LH of bars 31, 34, 36 in mvmt IV.

Latios212

Quote from: Deku Trombonist on August 09, 2017, 06:14:14 AM6/8 + 7/8 though, not 3/4 + 7/8.
The problem I see with that is that if you split the measure in half between the F# and the Gn, it seems to imply splitting the measure into four dotted eighth note units - 12/16 which doesn't feel right here. The reason I put it in 3/4 is because the bass rhythm there mimics the bass rhythm from m. 12-15 and 28-29 exactly. Plus this odd little section is bookended by two measures of definitive 4/4 and so keeping the quarter note as a unit would make reading it easier.
My arrangements and YouTube channel!

Quote from: Dudeman on February 22, 2016, 10:16:37 AM
who needs education when you can have WAIFUS!!!!!

Spoiler
[close]
turtle

Static

After lots of discussion on Discord, changes were made to fix accidentals, rhythms, time signatures, and other fun stuff. For m24-25 in Movement IV, it aligns with Latios' suggestion for the reasons he stated above.

The Deku Trombonist

There a whole lot of things I could say, but I don't really care so I'll just leave this here. Going from counting against the grain in bar 24, and then counting with the grain in bar 25 (the first beat) for no other reason than 'let's keep counting crotchets' is completely counter intuitive and does not make reading easier. Especially when it's the same rhythmic figure. Unless the person reading it never learned to count in odd/compound time and relies on shoehorning it into regular time. In which case they have other issues and NSM can't help them. And so what if it doesn't fit with bar 12...then change that to 8/8. It's 3+3+2 anyway, not 2+2+2+2. Don't change the thing that's right to fit with the thing that's wrong.

Quote from: Latios212 on August 09, 2017, 06:38:13 PMPlus this odd little section is bookended by two measures of definitive 4/4 and so keeping the quarter note as a unit would make reading it easier.
You're equating bars made up of rhythmic units of 3 to bars made up of rhythmic units of 2. Don't compare apples with oranges.