01:54:541 (1) - double greenline on top diff zzz
let me know
let me know
forum
Kero Kero Bonito - Flamingo (WTN3 Remix)
posted
Total Posts
95
Topic Starter
Done.
re bub
hi
[Hard]
01:28:223 (2,1) - consider moving the 2 to not be stacked, you've used stacks before but they indicated 1/1 gaps and not 1/2 gaps so this can throw people off (it's also cuz you have 01:31:632 (1,2,1) - which stacks but has a different rhythm gap u kno)
[Multicolor]
03:07:496 (1) - tbh you should really have this follow the kind of like rising thing the bg since it's like the most notable thing here, the 1/1 slider makes sense in kind of a "dying down" in terms of density perspective, but 2 sliders can be used to make it less dense clicking wise while also leading to the held 1/8 repeat. 1/1 slider isn't really following anything so yeah, I highly suggest you change it
03:16:223 (1,2,3) - kinda same
i'll be back when ur fine
[Hard]
01:28:223 (2,1) - consider moving the 2 to not be stacked, you've used stacks before but they indicated 1/1 gaps and not 1/2 gaps so this can throw people off (it's also cuz you have 01:31:632 (1,2,1) - which stacks but has a different rhythm gap u kno)
[Multicolor]
03:07:496 (1) - tbh you should really have this follow the kind of like rising thing the bg since it's like the most notable thing here, the 1/1 slider makes sense in kind of a "dying down" in terms of density perspective, but 2 sliders can be used to make it less dense clicking wise while also leading to the held 1/8 repeat. 1/1 slider isn't really following anything so yeah, I highly suggest you change it
03:16:223 (1,2,3) - kinda same
i'll be back when ur fine
i beg of you get this ranked
Can someone follow the vocals in the first part? 
pls rank w
old preview point is better plz chang
what happened :L
Topic Starter
Battle wrote:
hi
[Hard]
01:28:223 (2,1) - consider moving the 2 to not be stacked, you've used stacks before but they indicated 1/1 gaps and not 1/2 gaps so this can throw people off (it's also cuz you have 01:31:632 (1,2,1) - which stacks but has a different rhythm gap u kno) good point, fixed
[Multicolor]
03:07:496 (1) - tbh you should really have this follow the kind of like rising thing the bg since it's like the most notable thing here, the 1/1 slider makes sense in kind of a "dying down" in terms of density perspective, but 2 sliders can be used to make it less dense clicking wise while also leading to the held 1/8 repeat. 1/1 slider isn't really following anything so yeah, I highly suggest you change it
03:16:223 (1,2,3) - kinda same
actually I feel they are not necessary, or even not important - since I only mapped the "rising thing" once at the very beginning. Also, that overlapped with the hold slider part so I don't really want to map it out.
i'll be back when ur fine
Kagetsu wrote:
isn't this 110 bpm?
It's kinda questionable but I think it's 220 - the main, notable parts like vocals lands on 220. Only the drums feel like 110, but to me that's not enough for me to be convinced. I'll take 220 anyway.
explanations are fine to me, i feel the vocal explanation for the bpm is fine
w
w
Congrokolations!
finally!! gratz <3
there is no way this song is 220 bpm, the drums, structure, phrasing and everything scream 110.Nerova Riuz GX wrote:
Kagetsu wrote:
isn't this 110 bpm?
It's kinda questionable but I think it's 220 - the main, notable parts like vocals lands on 220. Only the drums feel like 110, but to me that's not enough for me to be convinced. I'll take 220 anyway.
just look for example at the first 4 measures: you have a repeated pattern at 00:01:087 - 00:03:268 - 00:05:450 - 00:07:632 -, with chord changes on the latter two and one vocal phrase each, on 110bpm each of those is one measure which is very natural while in your current timing has each as 2 measures. in the next 4 measures it's even clearer with the big synth downbeats. i could go on but you get the point.
i don't even understand what you mean by the vocals "landing on 220" tbh, would you mind elaborating on that more?
Topic Starter
hmm...interesting.Zhuriel wrote:
there is no way this song is 220 bpm, the drums, structure, phrasing and everything scream 110.
just look for example at the first 4 measures: you have a repeated pattern at 00:01:087 - 00:03:268 - 00:05:450 - 00:07:632 -, with chord changes on the latter two and one vocal phrase each, on 110bpm each of those is one measure which is very natural while in your current timing has each as 2 measures. in the next 4 measures it's even clearer with the big synth downbeats. i could go on but you get the point.
i don't even understand what you mean by the vocals "landing on 220" tbh, would you mind elaborating on that more?
welp, at the top of all of these, I'll say that this BPM topic is quite subjective, and ambiguous.
Let's get into the song itself deeper since it has some properties from both 110 and 220 BPM:
From 110:
- Basically, the drums work with 110.
- Some parts without vocal feels more 110 because of the arrangements (e.g. 02:11:996 - separated by my bookmarks)
- Chorus parts are more like 110 (e.g. 01:19:632 - )
- Intense parts like kiai are more 220-like, which contains more constant beats and vocal relay
- Iconic vocal parts, e.g. 00:23:723 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - that oh-oh thingy
- Rap-like vocal parts keep placing downbeats with long white ticks on 220, e.g. 00:44:723 - 01:02:177 -
Again, this is ambiguous because it has variants of properties, it just depends on how you look at it.
Here's my reply, and hope that can solve your problem.
(kinda mean but i have to say that the example you made is quite weird, since you paste only the timemarks of "white ticks" instead of "patterns", like you stated in the context. It did take me a while to understand what you meant. But your point is still constructive and worth to be discussed, still.)
Shrimps are relatively high on purines. This can lead to an increase in uric acid which, in high levels, can cause small crystal deposits to form in the joints leading to the uncommon form of arthritis known as gout.
i fail to see how any of these would imply 220. rhythmic density does not imply tempo, definitely not anywhere near as strongly as the structure of this implies 110.Nerova Riuz GX wrote:
From 220:
- Intense parts like kiai are more 220-like, which contains more constant beats and vocal relay
- Iconic vocal parts, e.g. 00:23:723 (2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - that oh-oh thingy
- Rap-like vocal parts keep placing downbeats with long white ticks on 220, e.g. 00:44:723 - 01:02:177 -
From all the things above I can be convinced by both of them, but I picked 220 since it represents more on the structure I made on this map. It's much more instinctive for people to understand because people commonly play tons of 1/2 notes on most of the maps.while there are sometimes ambiguous cases you have yet convince me that this is anything close to ambiguous. also, tempo does not depend on your mapping choices in any way so that is not an argument for 220 either.
Again, this is ambiguous because it has variants of properties, it just depends on how you look at it.
(kinda mean but i have to say that the example you made is quite weird, since you paste only the timemarks of "white ticks" instead of "patterns", like you stated in the context. It did take me a while to understand what you meant. But your point is still constructive and worth to be discussed, still.)i linked only the beginning timestamps of patterns since i wasn't really looking at the map, only the song and the timing
p/5985566
i actually would like to talk about this bpm topic
because let me tell you what
it doesn't matter whether if its doubled or not, they could've used 55 bpm and it would be still valid since every note are still snapped correctly, no one playing the map will care what bpm it is(that is unless you're playing nightcore i guess)
i would be actually quite disappointed if this map were to get dq'd because of bpm, like the map i've sent.
(also yes this song is most likely 110 bpm)
i actually would like to talk about this bpm topic
because let me tell you what
it doesn't matter whether if its doubled or not, they could've used 55 bpm and it would be still valid since every note are still snapped correctly, no one playing the map will care what bpm it is(that is unless you're playing nightcore i guess)
i would be actually quite disappointed if this map were to get dq'd because of bpm, like the map i've sent.
(also yes this song is most likely 110 bpm)
This might be interesting... I believe the BPM appears to be quite concerning, hence why would people actually time a BPM just for some vocal track? xddd
I mean, parts like 00:09:814 - 01:19:632 - 02:11:996 - (technically the pre-choruses) sounds definitely 110. I could really tell that the percussion mainly lands over every first and third ticks on timeline though. I assume you doubled BPM to alternatively speed up the pace of the slider velocity(?)
I mean, parts like 00:09:814 - 01:19:632 - 02:11:996 - (technically the pre-choruses) sounds definitely 110. I could really tell that the percussion mainly lands over every first and third ticks on timeline though. I assume you doubled BPM to alternatively speed up the pace of the slider velocity(?)
Actually the BPM of the whole music is just 110. The constant bass line and drum set reveal it tellingly. (this point is well explained by last BN post already)
Topic Starter
technically I don't really need to speed up SV by doubling the BPM - there's even no sv changes during the song, so why do I have to do that when I can just do it by changing the general SV?Cerulean Veyron wrote:
This might be interesting... I believe the BPM appears to be quite concerning, hence why would people actually time a BPM just for some vocal track? xddd
I mean, parts like 00:09:814 - 01:19:632 - 02:11:996 - (technically the pre-choruses) sounds definitely 110. I could really tell that the percussion mainly lands over every first and third ticks on timeline though. I assume you doubled BPM to alternatively speed up the pace of the slider velocity(?)
I still think it's 220 anyway, and some people i've asked said that it's 220 (actually, it's about 50:50 so I don't know if that's actually a problem.) at least setting that with both 110 and 220 makes sense to me.
(if that's obviously 110 then it should be pointed out by tons of those modders before please, and seriously no one has ever talked about this in the past 2 years so wtf is this situation now)
hope you don't mind me dropping my opinion, but i also agree and think that it should be 110 bpm rather than 220. based on the vocal intonations at 00:44:723 - , the vocalist is placing more emphasis on every two measures, which is what i think is more representative of the downbeat since these points are where the singer starts off a new phrase in the lyrics. also because the drum and bass matches a 110 bpm metronome more accurately but that's besides the point.
this is a pretty poor excuse though; just because people don't point it out earlier (either because they weren't sure themselves or have no experience with timing) doesn't mean that others might find issues with it.Nerova Riuz GX wrote:
(if that's obviously 110 then it should be pointed out by tons of those modders before please, and seriously no one has ever talked about this in the past 2 years so wtf is this situation now)
*pointing out that it's 110 BPM*
not only because of percussion but also general harmonic structure and muscial patterning, map's structure doesn't influence the song's structure
fun fact: most people either don't care or don't know much about timing, that's why they don't point it out~
not only because of percussion but also general harmonic structure and muscial patterning, map's structure doesn't influence the song's structure
fun fact: most people either don't care or don't know much about timing, that's why they don't point it out~
Everything has been said, to be honest. I also agree that 110 BPM is the most correct approximation for this song, without additional timing sections added.
So I see where the 220 came from. It seems to be the tempo was being based off the faster bass line and not the main beat. It should be 110 bpm, but the tempo doesn't really throw me off at all.
Really don't understand why you guys care so much about halving/doubling bpm's lol. The only thing that changes is the kiai flashing/nigthcore mod, and honestly 220 bpm is a better fit for how the song was mapped. I'm fine with either tbh, even if 110 is technically "more accurate".
Topic Starter
Updated with 110.
There should be nothing to be concerned about timing now.
There should be nothing to be concerned about timing now.
this so much.Monstrata wrote:
Really don't understand why you guys care so much about halving/doubling bpm's lol. The only thing that changes is the kiai flashing/nigthcore mod, and honestly 220 bpm is a better fit for how the song was mapped. I'm fine with either tbh, even if 110 is technically "more accurate".
it kinda makes me sad people care about this almost more than mapping mistakes or if there were unsnapped notes (lets be honest there were plenty of maps that got ranked with wrongly snapped notes and no one bothered to fix it or even point out) and people go crazy over double bpm when it literally has no impact on gameplay at all. you might say "but so does metadata?+!?!+'^+ why do u care then LOL!!" well if answer to that wasn't already obvious; they are different things. one of them impacts the artist directly while other one has almost no affect at all if any.
also fun fact renard themselves said big black is 720 bpm, while most can argue song is 180 bpm. what will we use on that then? would it be dq'd for using 180 bpm? or 720 bpm because it plays like 180? (im not talking about existing map btw)
im already calm, its just i dont get why people get so upset over double bpm xD
also we have a recently ranked map with obviously wrong metadata which i reported yet still went thru, so i dont actually think reporting helps at this point at all lmao
i guess sorry for caring too, oh well
also we have a recently ranked map with obviously wrong metadata which i reported yet still went thru, so i dont actually think reporting helps at this point at all lmao
i guess sorry for caring too, oh well
actually, you've all been wrong the entire time. this should be 440 bpm. The most thoroughly consistent rhythmical part of the song is the literal metronome playing on top of 90% of the song at a whopping 440 beats per minute! I can't believe everyone oversaw this one tbh.
(this is a meme)
(this is a meme)
this map got unqualified because of a literal unnoticeable difference in bpm
MariahCarey wrote:
actually, you've all been wrong the entire time. this should be 440 bpm. The most thoroughly consistent rhythmical part of the song is the literal metronome playing on top of 90% of the song at a whopping 440 beats per minute! I can't believe everyone oversaw this one tbh.
(this is a meme)
I really hope you where joking there. The bpm is 110, not 440. Also that isn't a metronome, that is a high hat that plays in triplets. The main beat isn't based of that, as there is a overall temp of a 110
whooshKaydax wrote:
I really hope you where joking there. The bpm is 110, not 440. Also that isn't a metronome, that is a high hat that plays in triplets. The main beat isn't based of that, as there is a overall temp of a 110MariahCarey wrote:
actually, you've all been wrong the entire time. this should be 440 bpm. The most thoroughly consistent rhythmical part of the song is the literal metronome playing on top of 90% of the song at a whopping 440 beats per minute! I can't believe everyone oversaw this one tbh.
(this is a meme)
how dare you say such a thing, it's obviously noticeable, it was exactly doubled! DOUBLE THE SPEED!! seeing that bpm on song select screen gave me nausea, literally unplayable.-Nishiki- wrote:
this map got unqualified because of a literal unnoticeable difference in bpm
i mean you literally quoted the part where i said that it's a meme ...Kaydax wrote:
I really hope you where joking there. The bpm is 110, not 440. Also that isn't a metronome, that is a high hat that plays in triplets. The main beat isn't based of that, as there is a overall temp of a 110
Rebub for new bpm!