MapleStory Sheet Music Site!

[Asian_Angel6414]

I am one of the transcribers known as "FireAngel843" on Maplesheets.org and I feel that I have to inform everyone that the website is having difficulties at this time. I am not sure what's going on with the website, however I have made an alternative website to host the the previous sheet music. Anyone can find their Maple Story sheet music at:

www.facebook.com/MapleSheets

(Please "Like" our FB page! We would appreciate it!)

I hope this helps for those who want Maple Story sheet music!. ^_____^

[Tukkun]

All of the sheets I checked are 100% accurate. They're too difficult for me, but maybe I'll find use for them later.

Thanks for sharing.

[Andross]

Wow.

That's certainty...something all right. You're trying to transcribe orchestrated music for a single piano, and it isn't working very well for quite a few songs. I mean, look at Omega Sector here. You're basically just picking out the melody with the right hand and blocking out a base line with octaves in the left. There's nothing wrong with that necessarily, it's just super basic and would sound, well, super basic.

And then there's this hot fresh mess of notes. What am I even looking at? How many different instruments are there? The only thing I can come up with is that each full page is a full list of instruments, but that doesn't mean anything because nothing's marked at all. Is that top line supposed to be a voice, or a flute? Or a violin? I mean I don't think it even matters because most of them aren't even playing half the time anyway.

Henesys is one of the "better" ones I've seen so far, but it has a problem that I saw in quite a few other pieces: That you guys like going way up into the stratosphere with the right hand constantly. Just because you can go up there doesn't mean that you should. If you don't want to change the original key of the song, you can always just do something simple like drop the whole thing by an octave or something, or just write the music so it doesn't go so high.

But the most, uh, outstanding thing to me was Happyville, and more specifically it and it's simplified version. First off, the simplified version changes stuff starting from the third line.

("difficult" version)


("simplified" version)

Do you see the problem here? There is nothing "simplified" about this, all that was done is changing the left hand to block out some chords. Everything in the right hand is difficult enough that if someone was capable of doing it, they are certainty more than capable of playing an eighth tied to a quarter.

I don't mean to sound overly harsh here, and I hope you guys continue to work on this and get better and better at it. There are just quite a few bad decisions (and some nonsensical ones) that you're making now that can form some pretty bad habits later on.

[OmegazeroGA]

Bring it on Cygnus Garden, I'm ready to play you.
I've always wanted to play Cygnus Garden for a while...and now I can.
..Even if I can't read bass clef that well.

[Link]

..Even if I can't read bass clef that well.

Heh. You and I both. It sucks having only played Trumpet for 5 or more years during school.

Oh well! Thanks for the link! This should be good practice. :P

[Asian_Angel6414]

Wow.

That's certainty...something all right. You're trying to transcribe orchestrated music for a single piano, and it isn't working very well for quite a few songs. I mean, look at Omega Sector here. You're basically just picking out the melody with the right hand and blocking out a base line with octaves in the left. There's nothing wrong with that necessarily, it's just super basic and would sound, well, super basic.

And then there's this hot fresh mess of notes. What am I even looking at? How many different instruments are there? The only thing I can come up with is that each full page is a full list of instruments, but that doesn't mean anything because nothing's marked at all. Is that top line supposed to be a voice, or a flute? Or a violin? I mean I don't think it even matters because most of them aren't even playing half the time anyway.

Henesys is one of the "better" ones I've seen so far, but it has a problem that I saw in quite a few other pieces: That you guys like going way up into the stratosphere with the right hand constantly. Just because you can go up there doesn't mean that you should. If you don't want to change the original key of the song, you can always just do something simple like drop the whole thing by an octave or something, or just write the music so it doesn't go so high.

But the most, uh, outstanding thing to me was Happyville, and more specifically it and it's simplified version. First off, the simplified version changes stuff starting from the third line.

("difficult" version)


("simplified" version)

Do you see the problem here? There is nothing "simplified" about this, all that was done is changing the left hand to block out some chords. Everything in the right hand is difficult enough that if someone was capable of doing it, they are certainty more than capable of playing an eighth tied to a quarter.

I don't mean to sound overly harsh here, and I hope you guys continue to work on this and get better and better at it. There are just quite a few bad decisions (and some nonsensical ones) that you're making now that can form some pretty bad habits later on.

Hm.. yes I can see your point. You may want to take your suggestions to the transcribers you have mentioned. You can message them at www.youtube.com/Volcayno and www.youtube.com/wizongod. Hope that helps. =3

Bring it on Cygnus Garden, I'm ready to play you.
I've always wanted to play Cygnus Garden for a while...and now I can.
..Even if I can't read bass clef that well.

I've recently posted Cygnus Garden, you may play till your heart's content. Hehee =3


These is the 10 new songs that were posted today:

Cygnus Garden by FireAngel843 aka Rima K.
Decisive Battle Demon Slayer by FireAngel843 aka Rima K.
Edelstein by Gyc6001
Temple of Time Piano by Tessalowyun
DragonDream by WingedSoulsLugiaa
Ellinia Forest by MapleOnThePiano
Slime Tree Dungeon (Duet) by MapleOnThePiano
Ereve (RaindropFlower) Duet by MapleOnThePiano
Sleepywood (Duet) by MapleOnThePiano
Title2010Winter (New Login Theme) by Password6863


Hope you guys enjoy! ^__^

[Aircalibur]

Oh god, Dragon Dream. That is amazing.

My inability to read treble clefs though...

[Retalion]

Wow.

That's certainty...something all right. You're trying to transcribe orchestrated music for a single piano, and it isn't working very well for quite a few songs. I mean, look at Omega Sector here. You're basically just picking out the melody with the right hand and blocking out a base line with octaves in the left. There's nothing wrong with that necessarily, it's just super basic and would sound, well, super basic.

And then there's this hot fresh mess of notes. What am I even looking at? How many different instruments are there? The only thing I can come up with is that each full page is a full list of instruments, but that doesn't mean anything because nothing's marked at all. Is that top line supposed to be a voice, or a flute? Or a violin? I mean I don't think it even matters because most of them aren't even playing half the time anyway.

Henesys is one of the "better" ones I've seen so far, but it has a problem that I saw in quite a few other pieces: That you guys like going way up into the stratosphere with the right hand constantly. Just because you can go up there doesn't mean that you should. If you don't want to change the original key of the song, you can always just do something simple like drop the whole thing by an octave or something, or just write the music so it doesn't go so high.

But the most, uh, outstanding thing to me was Happyville, and more specifically it and it's simplified version. First off, the simplified version changes stuff starting from the third line.

("difficult" version)


("simplified" version)

Do you see the problem here? There is nothing "simplified" about this, all that was done is changing the left hand to block out some chords. Everything in the right hand is difficult enough that if someone was capable of doing it, they are certainty more than capable of playing an eighth tied to a quarter.

I don't mean to sound overly harsh here, and I hope you guys continue to work on this and get better and better at it. There are just quite a few bad decisions (and some nonsensical ones) that you're making now that can form some pretty bad habits later on.

Am I the only one not seeing the difficulty in that? That looks perfectly reasonable to play from my perspective...

As for why that second one is simplified, the blocked off chords give you less to worry about, allowing you to focus your attention on that "difficult" right hand. Simply put, if your left hand is simply droning on playing a D chord over and over, it gives you one less thing to worry about, diverting your attention to the right hand. Its the same concept behind hands separate practicing, slow metronome practicing, and melody first practicing.

Music has patterns, and once you can recognize them, it isn't hard. For example, once you recognize that there's a voice exchange between the outer voices in the treble, then reading it becomes not so hard after all.

PS: You can't just drop the whole freaking piece an octave. It changes the mood of the piece completely. Try it some time. Play your Henesys theme two octaves down, and tell me if it keeps the playful, careless mood it has.

Agreed on the orchestral score but not much beyond that unfortunately...

[Felicitates]

This is great! Thanks so much for posting these <3

[Andross]

Am I the only one not seeing the difficulty in that? That looks perfectly reasonable to play from my perspective...

As for why that second one is simplified, the blocked off chords give you less to worry about, allowing you to focus your attention on that "difficult" right hand. Simply put, if your left hand is simply droning on playing a D chord over and over, it gives you one less thing to worry about, diverting your attention to the right hand. Its the same concept behind hands separate practicing, slow metronome practicing, and melody first practicing.

Music has patterns, and once you can recognize them, it isn't hard. For example, once you recognize that there's a voice exchange between the outer voices in the treble, then reading it becomes not so hard after all.

PS: You can't just drop the whole freaking piece an octave. It changes the mood of the piece completely. Try it some time. Play your Henesys theme two octaves down, and tell me if it keeps the playful, careless mood it has.

Agreed on the orchestral score but not much beyond that unfortunately...

Have you ever transcribed music? Because it doesn't sound like you have. It doesn't sound like you've played piano for very long, at any rate.

First off, I thought I explained pretty well why I thought the blocked out chords were unnecessary, but let me try again: Anyone who can play at a level high enough (which really isn't high at all, really) to interpret the right hand can also play the left along with it. This isn't some made up theory, I've personally watched several individuals learn piano from scratch; believe me when I say that there really isn't that much of a difficulty spike between the two hands that would warrant butchering the song like it has been. The problem isn't that it's simplified, it's that it isn't simplified enough. Look at it again:





If I were trying to simplify a piece for one of my friend's beginning students, something I've had to do several times, I wouldn't just leave that right hand part there. First off, if I was going to make the left hand that simple I would have the melody in the right hand broken down into a monophony, so it would be easier to pick up for a beginner. But if I were doing that, I wouldn't leave the left hand quite that simple, because right now there is so much dissonance between the two hands that it's comical.

Secondly, since I know you're going to home in on this quote here like it's a flower and you're a honeybee fueled by hate:

It doesn't sound like you've played piano for very long, at any rate.

Let me explain exactly what I mean. It's because of the following quote here:

As for why that second one is simplified, the blocked off chords give you less to worry about, allowing you to focus your attention on that "difficult" right hand. Simply put, if your left hand is simply droning on playing a D chord over and over, it gives you one less thing to worry about, diverting your attention to the right hand. Its the same concept behind hands separate practicing, slow metronome practicing, and melody first practicing.

This is an incredibly horrible thing to say to anyone trying to learn to write music. Never, ever ever ever do this. The whole concept of practicing one hand at a time (which once you've played long enough, you'll find is actually wholly unnecessary and actually detrimental to yourself in the long run) is only something people do because trying to figure out a new piece of music with both hands is incredibly difficult for inexperienced players. Normally, what happens is that over the years, you'll gradually find that you'll either drop the habit completely for easier songs as you sightread, or as I find most of my peers and colleagues do, piece together the melody hands-separated for measure or two, maybe a line or two if the piece is particularly challenging, and then put them together.

If a piece is written with the intention of reinforcing the behavior of practicing with your hands separated or focusing on a particular hand, it is badly written. There are no exceptions to this rule. Piano isn't about having one hand play and the other sit around as backup, it's a musical instrument. Let me put it like this: if someone's playing the flute, they play the notes and whatever they entail, whether that be melody, harmony, or anything else. A well written song or part will have the player playing using the entire instrument.

Piano is no different. A good piece of music won't do something like have one hand be unimportant, it'll have both hands working together to produce a song. That's the goal, and it's why I brought up changing the octave of the piece. Most of the time, as a rule, you keep the activity of a song at the center of the piano. This isn't a hard set rule, but it is something that you'll find as you play more and more music. While many songs do have the pianist away from the center often or constantly, it is very rare to find a piece that consistently keeps the melody off in the stratosphere for no reason. This is one of the other reasons I think you aren't very experienced, because you think that changing an octave could throw off the mood of a song. There is no reason, none at all, that something like the Henesys theme wouldn't sound just as good were it brought down an octave. I'm not saying playing everything two octaves below middle C, I'm suggesting that you simply bring the melody down from two octaves above middle C to one above.

The melody for Henesys is written for a flute. The flute has a range that generally starts at middle C and goes up from there, so songs written for flute are much higher. The piano does not have that limitation, and trying to force a melody written for a different instrument with a different range is an awful, awful idea. Would you say a piano playing a part originally written for contrabass, tuba, or bassoon would have to play the melody as low as those instruments originally did?

[Retalion]

Have you ever transcribed music? Because it doesn't sound like you have. It doesn't sound like you've played piano for very long, at any rate.

You're correct in saying that I don't transcribe very often, as I've never had a need to. I've always played things by ear, so I've never had need to transcribe. That being said, I appreciate your wonderful (emphasized TWICE!) "compliment" of my "piano skills". Lets just say that I've played long enough to know what I'm talking about.

First off, I thought I explained pretty well why I thought the blocked out chords were unnecessary, but let me try again: Anyone who can play at a level high enough (which really isn't high at all, really) to interpret the right hand can also play the left along with it. This isn't some made up theory, I've personally watched several individuals learn piano from scratch; believe me when I say that there really isn't that much of a difficulty spike between the two hands that would warrant butchering the song like it has been. The problem isn't that it's simplified, it's that it isn't simplified enough. Look at it again:





If I were trying to simplify a piece for one of my friend's beginning students, something I've had to do several times, I wouldn't just leave that right hand part there. First off, if I was going to make the left hand that simple I would have the melody in the right hand broken down into a monophony, so it would be easier to pick up for a beginner. But if I were doing that, I wouldn't leave the left hand quite that simple, because right now there is so much dissonance between the two hands that it's comical.

You're right. It COULD be simplified further. But that wasn't what you were saying at first. Here's what you said:

Do you see the problem here? There is nothing "simplified" about this, all that was done is changing the left hand to block out some chords.

What you initially said is that blocking the chords is NOT simplifying (or at least that's what I'm interpreting from that), to which I replied that "it IS simplifying as..."

The point in question wasn't how far it could or should be simplified but whether it was simplified at all.

Would I agree with you that if I were to simplify it for a beginner, I'd do something to simplify the right hand as well? Perhaps.

Would I refute the notion that the second one is simpler than the first? Nope.

Secondly, since I know you're going to home in on this quote here like it's a flower and you're a honeybee fueled by hate:

I'll just take the high road and kindly skip past it. No point in feeding that which lives under a bridge.

This is an incredibly horrible thing to say to anyone trying to learn to write music. Never, ever ever ever do this. The whole concept of practicing one hand at a time (which once you've played long enough, you'll find is actually wholly unnecessary and actually detrimental to yourself in the long run) is only something people do because trying to figure out a new piece of music with both hands is incredibly difficult for inexperienced players. Normally, what happens is that over the years, you'll gradually find that you'll either drop the habit completely for easier songs as you sightread, or as I find most of my peers and colleagues do, piece together the melody hands-separated for measure or two, maybe a line or two if the piece is particularly challenging, and then put them together.

The idea is the same. You segment smaller sections and get familiar with that before moving on to bigger chunks. Again, you're right. At a certain level, people DONT practice hands separate anymore. And while there might be a general consensus that it becomes obsolete, that is not entirely true. Hands separate practice, even after knowing a piece gives you more familiarity with the parts. This is particular of use with Fugues, which breaks it down further, not into hands, but individual voices. Those people who decide to tackle fugues head-on without any hands separate work are probably also the ones who miss subjects and answers and play them as continuous blobs of music.

I'm not sure how you're interpreting what I'm saying, but I think we're talking about essentially the same thing. Simplifying things to make it easier to learn, which is what you're talking about with hands-separated for a measure or two/line or two before putting it together. I'm sorry if I was unclear, but when mentioning those methods, I did not mean to just run through whole works that way; I was referring to practicing them to build the foundations before moving forward. Just like building a house always starts from the foundations, learning to play a piece does as well.

Yes, in some instances, hands separate work is useless (the one that immediately comes to mind is triplet vs. eighth passages), but I would never refute hands separate practice as something "beginner".

If a piece is written with the intention of reinforcing the behavior of practicing with your hands separated or focusing on a particular hand, it is badly written. There are no exceptions to this rule. Piano isn't about having one hand play and the other sit around as backup, it's a musical instrument. Let me put it like this: if someone's playing the flute, they play the notes and whatever they entail, whether that be melody, harmony, or anything else. A well written song or part will have the player playing using the entire instrument.

Again, as a finished product, I would agree. But what's wrong with learning it from the ground up? What's wrong with using the simplified version to learn the basics before moving on to the complete transcribed version?

Piano is no different. A good piece of music won't do something like have one hand be unimportant, it'll have both hands working together to produce a song. That's the goal, and it's why I brought up changing the octave of the piece. Most of the time, as a rule, you keep the activity of a song at the center of the piano. This isn't a hard set rule, but it is something that you'll find as you play more and more music. While many songs do have the pianist away from the center often or constantly, it is very rare to find a piece that consistently keeps the melody off in the stratosphere for no reason. This is one of the other reasons I think you aren't very experienced, because you think that changing an octave could throw off the mood of a song. There is no reason, none at all, that something like the Henesys theme wouldn't sound just as good were it brought down an octave. I'm not saying playing everything two octaves below middle C, I'm suggesting that you simply bring the melody down from two octaves above middle C to one above.

The melody for Henesys is written for a flute. The flute has a range that generally starts at middle C and goes up from there, so songs written for flute are much higher. The piano does not have that limitation, and trying to force a melody written for a different instrument with a different range is an awful, awful idea. Would you say a piano playing a part originally written for contrabass, tuba, or bassoon would have to play the melody as low as those instruments originally did?

And here is where I disagree. Would I play the part originally written for those very low instruments down there? Nope. Simply put, it'd get too muddy down there. That being said, would I move it up all the way to middle C? Nope. I would put it somewhere in between. Different ranges in the piano have different complexions. For example, the very bottom of most pianos are very murky. As it reaches the center, it becomes warmer. As it goes upwards, it has almost a delicate sound. What I'm saying is, the range DOES matter. Think Henesys. Think all that is associated with it. Now think if it still fits if it was sung by a bass.

Or Elgar's Cello Concerto played in that Henesys C5-C6 range. Tell me if it's the same thing.

At that rate, you might as well change the key as well (yes, changing the key changes the mood too. Imagine Henesys in F+ instead of the key given. It would sound less vibrant and lively). Pieces are written in their instruments, keys, and ranges for a reason. If everything were written in middle-C range for the piano, it'd be boring.

In the end, there's more than one way to approach things. Music is an art. As is transcribing. Music can be presented in many different ways, and that's the fun in it: there's more than one way to do it! Perhaps you should get off your high horse, and appreciate the diversity that comes with music, the different methods of learning, the different methods of presenting it, and most importantly, the fun that can come with it. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying there's more than one right way of doing things.

[Andross]

I'm not sure how you're interpreting what I'm saying, but I think we're talking about essentially the same thing. Simplifying things to make it easier to learn, which is what you're talking about with hands-separated for a measure or two/line or two before putting it together. I'm sorry if I was unclear, but when mentioning those methods, I did not mean to just run through whole works that way; I was referring to practicing them to build the foundations before moving forward. Just like building a house always starts from the foundations, learning to play a piece does as well.

Yes, in some instances, hands separate work is useless (the one that immediately comes to mind is triplet vs. eighth passages), but I would never refute hands separate practice as something "beginner".

Again, as a finished product, I would agree. But what's wrong with learning it from the ground up? What's wrong with using the simplified version to learn the basics before moving on to the complete transcribed version?

Okay then, I apologize for that; I was thinking that you meant to practice entire pieces one hand at a time.

But that's really the only thing here. There is nothing wrong with practicing a simplified version of a piece before moving on to a full version. The point I'm trying to make here is that this isn't simplified enough. The right hand is exactly the same in both versions, and the only difference is the blocked out chords in the left. The problem here is that the left hand isn't difficult enough to warrant this in the first place, which is what I was trying to say in my last post. If you make a simpler version of a song, you simplify both hands. If the piece is difficult enough for someone that they need this "simplified" version (not my hypothetical one, the one we actually have here), then removing all difficulty from the left hand isn't going to help much as the left hand is magnitudes easier than the right. I mean, is this too far a stretch here?

The second "simplified" piece is completely unnecessary and helps reinforce the bad habit of not wanting to focus on one hand. It is not truly a "simplified" piece, and if you gave this to any professor he'd fail you. My point here is that if a person can play one hand in this song, they can play both with a bit of work. If a person cannot play one hand, especially if that hand is the left one which is much easier than the right, they are not ready to play this song. This "simplified" version would not help them in the slightest. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put this.

And here is where I disagree. Would I play the part originally written for those very low instruments down there? Nope. Simply put, it'd get too muddy down there. That being said, would I move it up all the way to middle C? Nope. I would put it somewhere in between. Different ranges in the piano have different complexions. For example, the very bottom of most pianos are very murky. As it reaches the center, it becomes warmer. As it goes upwards, it has almost a delicate sound. What I'm saying is, the range DOES matter. Think Henesys. Think all that is associated with it. Now think if it still fits if it was sung by a bass.

Or Elgar's Cello Concerto played in that Henesys C5-C6 range. Tell me if it's the same thing.

At that rate, you might as well change the key as well (yes, changing the key changes the mood too. Imagine Henesys in F+ instead of the key given. It would sound less vibrant and lively). Pieces are written in their instruments, keys, and ranges for a reason. If everything were written in middle-C range for the piano, it'd be boring.

In the end, there's more than one way to approach things. Music is an art. As is transcribing. Music can be presented in many different ways, and that's the fun in it: there's more than one way to do it! Perhaps you should get off your high horse, and appreciate the diversity that comes with music, the different methods of learning, the different methods of presenting it, and most importantly, the fun that can come with it. I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying there's more than one right way of doing things.

You know what? No. You don't get to do that. You don't get to completely ignore what I said and then accuse me of being on a high horse with that last comment.

Is music an art? Yes.

Is transcribing an art? Arguably, yes.

Does something being an art mean that it's suddenly immune to criticism? No, and anyone who thinks so doesn't deserve to do so in the first place. This is exactly the kind of attitude that perpetuates sites like deviantart and the reason that many people dislike it so much, that because something is an art or is "their style" the people offering criticism are suddenly just being big ol' meanies who won't get off their high horses and just enjoy being hateful people. Stop it. There is nothing wrong with an honest criticism. Even dishonest criticism can be useful at times, but the phrase "I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying there's more than one right way of doing things" in the method you use it is intellectually dishonest.

I never said anything about moving the melody of Henesys into the bass. I specifically said I wasn't moving it into the bass, you even quoted me as saying I only suggested bumping the right hand an octave down. If you want to play it that high, go right ahead, because the thing is here that I was giving a few suggestions on how to improve the transcribing of these pieces. Having the right hand so high isn't something only in this piece, I mentioned it because it's found very commonly throughout many of the transcriptions they have up so far. I even said that originally, but I guess that doesn't matter because we're only talking about Henesys now (except when you start namedropping other songs or mentioning fugues trying to prove me wrong)

Edit: I did read the first part of your post (the parts before where I quoted you. I didn't quote that part because I felt that the entirety of your post up until the first section I quoted was all talking about the same thing. I already hate having to break posts up like this. I like being able to just quote a single post a lot more, because it actually feels more like a debate/discussion (even if it's a discussion where calling the other person a meanie face is an acceptable method). I personally feel that when you break up posts, you're no longer addressing the person, but rather their points. It makes the whole thing feel impersonal, at least to me. Just wanted to let you know that I did read it, just didn't quote.
Anyway that's my story welp cya [/edit]

[Retalion]

Okay then, I apologize for that; I was thinking that you meant to practice entire pieces one hand at a time.

But that's really the only thing here. There is nothing wrong with practicing a simplified version of a piece before moving on to a full version. The point I'm trying to make here is that this isn't simplified enough. The right hand is exactly the same in both versions, and the only difference is the blocked out chords in the left. The problem here is that the left hand isn't difficult enough to warrant this in the first place, which is what I was trying to say in my last post. If you make a simpler version of a song, you simplify both hands. If the piece is difficult enough for someone that they need this "simplified" version (not my hypothetical one, the one we actually have here), then removing all difficulty from the left hand isn't going to help much as the left hand is magnitudes easier than the right. I mean, is this too far a stretch here?

The second "simplified" piece is completely unnecessary and helps reinforce the bad habit of not wanting to focus on one hand. It is not truly a "simplified" piece, and if you gave this to any professor he'd fail you. My point here is that if a person can play one hand in this song, they can play both with a bit of work. If a person cannot play one hand, especially if that hand is the left one which is much easier than the right, they are not ready to play this song. This "simplified" version would not help them in the slightest. I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put this.


You know what? No. You don't get to do that. You don't get to completely ignore what I said and then accuse me of being on a high horse with that last comment.

Is music an art? Yes.

Is transcribing an art? Arguably, yes.

Does something being an art mean that it's suddenly immune to criticism? No, and anyone who thinks so doesn't deserve to do so in the first place. This is exactly the kind of attitude that perpetuates sites like deviantart and the reason that many people dislike it so much, that because something is an art or is "their style" the people offering criticism are suddenly just being big ol' meanies who won't get off their high horses and just enjoy being hateful people. Stop it. There is nothing wrong with an honest criticism. Even dishonest criticism can be useful at times, but the phrase "I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying there's more than one right way of doing things" in the method you use it is intellectually dishonest.

I never said anything about moving the melody of Henesys into the bass. I specifically said I wasn't moving it into the bass, you even quoted me as saying I only suggested bumping the right hand an octave down. If you want to play it that high, go right ahead, because the thing is here that I was giving a few suggestions on how to improve the transcribing of these pieces. Having the right hand so high isn't something only in this piece, I mentioned it because it's found very commonly throughout many of the transcriptions they have up so far. I even said that originally, but I guess that doesn't matter because we're only talking about Henesys now (except when you start namedropping other songs or mentioning fugues trying to prove me wrong)

Edit: I did read the first part of your post (the parts before where I quoted you. I didn't quote that part because I felt that the entirety of your post up until the first section I quoted was all talking about the same thing. I already hate having to break posts up like this. I like being able to just quote a single post a lot more, because it actually feels more like a debate/discussion (even if it's a discussion where calling the other person a meanie face is an acceptable method). I personally feel that when you break up posts, you're no longer addressing the person, but rather their points. It makes the whole thing feel impersonal, at least to me. Just wanted to let you know that I did read it, just didn't quote.
Anyway that's my story welp cya [/edit]

I'm glad we could come to an agreement on some things. As for your reasoning behind your denial of the second version of being simplified, I can accept that as well.

As for the whole thing about art, that's the thing. There are people like you and I who've had intensive training in music. And to us, everything looks juvenile and poor. And rightfully so. We've had years of training. They've only informally done it wherever they do it for short periods of time. It's expected that there's a gap between production. I tell that to my friends all the time about pop music and certain videos on youtube. Its really simple, and often devoid of talent. In fact, at times, from my (or our to some extent), it makes us want to tear our hairs out. I'm not saying criticism is bad or that you aren't allowed to criticize. I'm saying it becomes awfully painful if you were to point out every single poor demonstration of music/art with the intensity that you did. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but your initial post had a "omg, no. I CANNOT believe you did it. I have a problem with the way you do things, and I take it personally (well maybe not personally, but I hope you get where I'm going)". What I merely meant is that there's simply too much bad art out there to point and scream and yell about. That it's not worth your time, because to be honest, they probably dont care. Perhaps it was worded poorly, but what I'm saying is you can't expect people to work on the level you do, as its unfair, as they have not had the training you have. You wouldn't expect someone who just started learning piano to play at a virtuosic level. Neither would you expect quality, university-music-school-level transcription from a bunch of amateurs (Rima and others, I really hope you don't take offense to that). I agree in the sense that I disagree with "If you have nothing good to say, don't say it", because I shoot straight to the point most of the time just as well. I just don't feel its fair to judge them and expect them to be at your level, that's all. And to be honest, it's kinda pointless, cause no matter how you tell these people, the level of production they give will probably never be up to your standards.

Once again on the range thing, I feel my point still stands: Changing anything about a piece (though technically transcribing it for piano is already changing something) changes the context of it from the original intention of the composer. Point taken that perhaps the other pieces are up there as well, as I probably didn't spend as much time looking at these scores as you have. That being said, I would just like to clarify I was not trying to name-drop. Fugues were an example of simplified practicing used earlier about simplification. As for the Elgar Cello Concerto, any piece would've worked for the context of my point of playing music which evoke certain emotions in a different key, register, or timbre. I just chose a cello concerto because it was extreme, as it sends the point more concisely.

As for your edit, I quoted the whole post purposely this time, though I usually don't, because if that's the way you prefer it, that's fine with me. You're exactly right. I prefer to address points over people, because when you get into people, it can turn ugly fast (imagine if I jumped on your first comment about my piano level and started ranting about qualifications and whatnot...). As I said though, I'm fine with both. Its nice to see people passionate about their art. But over-zealous passion for it takes the enjoyment out of it.

[Andross]

I'm glad we could come to an agreement on some things. As for your reasoning behind your denial of the second version of being simplified, I can accept that as well.

As for the whole thing about art, that's the thing. There are people like you and I who've had intensive training in music. And to us, everything looks juvenile and poor. And rightfully so. We've had years of training. They've only informally done it wherever they do it for short periods of time. It's expected that there's a gap between production. I tell that to my friends all the time about pop music and certain videos on youtube. Its really simple, and often devoid of talent. In fact, at times, from my (or our to some extent), it makes us want to tear our hairs out. I'm not saying criticism is bad or that you aren't allowed to criticize. I'm saying it becomes awfully painful if you were to point out every single poor demonstration of music/art with the intensity that you did. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but your initial post had a "omg, no. I CANNOT believe you did it. I have a problem with the way you do things, and I take it personally (well maybe not personally, but I hope you get where I'm going)". What I merely meant is that there's simply too much bad art out there to point and scream and yell about. That it's not worth your time, because to be honest, they probably dont care. Perhaps it was worded poorly, but what I'm saying is you can't expect people to work on the level you do, as its unfair, as they have not had the training you have. You wouldn't expect someone who just started learning piano to play at a virtuosic level. Neither would you expect quality, university-music-school-level transcription from a bunch of amateurs (Rima and others, I really hope you don't take offense to that). I agree in the sense that I disagree with "If you have nothing good to say, don't say it", because I shoot straight to the point most of the time just as well. I just don't feel its fair to judge them and expect them to be at your level, that's all. And to be honest, it's kinda pointless, cause no matter how you tell these people, the level of production they give will probably never be up to your standards.

Once again on the range thing, I feel my point still stands: Changing anything about a piece (though technically transcribing it for piano is already changing something) changes the context of it from the original intention of the composer. Point taken that perhaps the other pieces are up there as well, as I probably didn't spend as much time looking at these scores as you have. That being said, I would just like to clarify I was not trying to name-drop. Fugues were an example of simplified practicing used earlier about simplification. As for the Elgar Cello Concerto, any piece would've worked for the context of my point of playing music which evoke certain emotions in a different key, register, or timbre. I just chose a cello concerto because it was extreme, as it sends the point more concisely.

As for your edit, I quoted the whole post purposely this time, though I usually don't, because if that's the way you prefer it, that's fine with me. You're exactly right. I prefer to address points over people, because when you get into people, it can turn ugly fast (imagine if I jumped on your first comment about my piano level and started ranting about qualifications and whatnot...). As I said though, I'm fine with both. Its nice to see people passionate about their art. But over-zealous passion for it takes the enjoyment out of it.

At this point, I'm glad the whole thing got sorted out before it got bad I put my foot any further in my mouth. Sorry about all the implications I ended up making, though.

Since we're both more or less agreeing with each other at this point (or agreeing to disagree as it stands on some counts) and there really isn't anything else to talk about, I'd like to thank you for not getting fed up with my dumb tired angry self when I wrote that (errgh, looking back on those posts now there's a lot I'd change in my tone and otherwise).

[ThatWasMyKil]

every six months maplesheets comes back haha

[Asian_Angel6414]

Oh wow...it was pretty interesting to read Jackk's and Andross input about how the transcriptions should be transcribed. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. As I said before, if you have suggestions, please take those to the designated transcriber. You can find the transcriber list on the "About "section on our FB page. =3 Or, you can also make your own transcriptions. xD As I always say, the more the merrier!

Anywho, this is the list of contributed transcriptions from various transcribers that can be found on the site:

Amoria (Piano) by Juni Han
Amoria PQ (Piano) by Magicallyie
Aqua Road Hunting 1 (Piano) by Juni Han and David Hajje
Aqua Road Hunting 1 (Piano) by Volcayno
Aquarium (Piano) by Skeer
Aquarium (Piano) by Volcayno
Cash Shop (Flute and Violin) by Dan
Cash Shop (Piano) by Levin Tan
Cash Shop (Piano) by Skeer
Cygnus Garden by FireAngel843 aka “Rima K.”
Decisive Battle Demon Slayer by FireAngel843 aka “Rima K.”
Dragon Canyon (Piano) by Juni Han
Dragon Dream (Evan) by WingedSoulsLugiaa
Edelstein by Gyc6001
El Nath (Piano) by Rangerds
Ellinia (Piano) by David Hajje
Ellina (Piano) by Volcayno
Ellinia Forest by MapleOnThePiano
Ellinia Tree (Piano) by Levin Tan
Eos Tower (Inside) (Piano) by Juni Han and David Hajje
Ereve (Raindrop Flower) Duet by MapleOnThePiano
Forest of Dead Trees (Piano) by Rangerds
Forgotten Path of Time (Deeper) (Piano) by Levin Tan
Forgotten Path of Time (Piano) by Skeer
Happyville (Piano) by Rangerds
Happyville (Simplified Piano) by Rangerds
Henesys (Piano) by David Hajje
Henesys Market (Piano) by Volcayno
Kulan Field (Flute and Piano) by Levin Tan
Kulan Field (Piano) by Levin Tan
Lith Harbour (Piano) by Juni Han and David Hajje
Lith Harbour (Piano) by Volcayno
Ludi PQ (Piano) by Rangerds
Ludibrium (Piano) by Levin Tan
Ludibrium PQ (Piano) by Rangerds
Ludibrium Ship Ride (Piano) by Ernest Tan and Levin Tan
Omega Sector (Piano) by Volcayno
Orbis (Piano) by Levin Tan
Orbis Tower (Piano) by Levin Tan
Rien Ice Cave (Flue and Piano) by Levin Tan
Rien Ice Cave (Piano) by Levin Tan
Riprey Ice Area (Piano) by Juni Han
Sleepywood (Duet) by MapleOnThePiano
Slime Tree (Duet) by MapleOnThePiano
South of Ellinia (Piano) by Levin Tan
Temple of Time by Tessalowyun
Title2010Winter (New Login Theme) by Password6863
Warped Path of Time (Piano) by Levin Tan
Warped Path of Time (Violin) by xXgengarXx


These are the latest transcriptions that can be found on the site:

Cygnus Garden by FireAngel843 aka “Rima K.”
Decisive Battle Demon Slayer by FireAngel843 aka “Rima K.”
Dragon Dream (Evan) by WingedSoulsLugiaa
Edelstein by Gyc6001
Ellinia Forest by MapleOnThePiano
Ereve (Raindrop Flower) Duet by MapleOnThePiano
Sleepywood (Duet) by MapleOnThePiano
Slime Tree (Duet) by MapleOnThePiano
Temple of Time by Tessalowyun
Title2010Winter (New Login Theme) by Password6863

[Yui]

I love all Ereve music, ahh . Ahah, and is it just me, or does the Red Leaf BGM sound like an anime OP?

[Mezmorizor]

As an outside voice with some classical training(probably not as much as you guys and not on piano, but I regress), Andross was right on some points, and Retalion was right on some others. Like Andross said, the simplified version of the piece shown was completely unnecessary. It gets rid of polyphony in the left hand, but there's polyphony in the right hand too. If somebody has the ability to play the right hand, adding the left hand would be trivial for both versions. The "stratosphere" parts are not a problem at all. If the melody goes to C6, the part better go to C6. Also, I disagree about them being in the stratosphere in the first place, F5 isn't all that high and the Henesys theme tends to hang around there.

Retalion is right in that you can't just drop things an octave or two without completely changing the way it sounds. There's a reason why tubas always play the roots and 5ths of chords. Anything else just sounds bad when it's played that low. There is also a big difference in sound between two similar keys. C major sounds considerably different from both Db major and G major.

For both of you, the word you were looking for is arranging, not transcribing.