1. Octaikon (6.82 stars, 4200 notes)

• [Octaikon]

1. 00:18:450 (10) - d ? The vocal there has the same pitch as 00:18:614 (11) - .
2. 00:30:759 (39,41) - swap these notes to k d ? The instrument pitch at 00:30:759 (39) - is higher than that at 00:31:088 (41) -
3. 00:31:417 (43) - change to k if you change ^
4. 00:32:074 (47,49) - same as 00:30:759 (39,41) -
5. 00:32:732 (51) - change to k if you change ^
6. 00:41:444 (114,115,116) - consider changing this to kdd ? It follows the vocal pitch better imo.
7. 00:53:198 (203,204) - swap these notes to dk ? It seems to match more the vocal.
8. 01:16:951 (379) - k ? It has a similar sound as 01:17:608 -
9. 01:18:266 (387) - k would be better, as it has an identical pitch as the previous 01:18:102 (385,386) -
10. 01:22:376 (427,428) - k d could fit the pitch of the music well imo.
11. 01:24:184 (444,447) - k k, similar reason as ^
12. 01:30:924 (23) - k, similar reason as ^
13. 01:33:554 (46) - ^
14. 01:36:184 (69) - ^
15. 01:37:417 - add a note here ? A noticeable sound can be heard.
16. 01:57:800 (73) - move to 01:57:965 - and change to k would result in a better flow imo.
17. 02:08:239 (130,134) - d k so that the identical sounds at 02:07:910 (128,130,133) - could be mapped consistently as don.
18. 02:25:334 (123,124,125,126) - k k d d could fit the pitch of the music better.
19. 02:42:102 (267) - add finish here for a better emphasis ?
20. 02:55:252 (341) - ^
21. 02:56:567 (346) - ^
22. 03:04:540 (392) - consider deleting this note ? I couldn't hear any sound to be followed there.
23. 03:47:101 (10,11) - swapping these notes to k d could follow the pitch in a way better.
24. 04:20:445 (146,147) - k d for pattern consistency as 04:19:631 (142,143) -
25. 04:21:101 (149) - change to k if you change ^
26. 04:35:527 (189,190) - k d would be much better if you want to follow the vocal pitch.
27. 04:39:134 (198) - k, as it has the same pitch as 04:38:478 (196) -
28. 04:42:405 (208) - k, as it has a higher pitch than 04:42:731 (209) -
29. 04:44:687 (216) - d could fit well as the pitch drops.
30. 04:45:014 (217,218,219) - k k d would be better regarding the vocal pitch.
31. 05:20:230 (455) - k would fit the music nicely.
32. The note patterns from 05:24:882 to 05:27:449 - sounds weird to me. Here is the suggestion: (cursor at 05:26:005 - )
33. 06:36:754 (61) - I think you may have missed the finish here ?
34. From 07:55:809 to 07:56:126 - form a 1/4 dkdkd quintuplet and delete 07:56:206 (263) - seems better to me, as this could follow the sounds there well.
35. 08:06:972 (357,358) - change to kk and delete 08:07:128 (359) - for the same purpose as ^ ?
36. 08:44:641 (684,685) - k D could fit the vocal pitch well imo.
37. 08:59:009 (777) - k ? It has an identical sound as 08:59:325 (779) - possesses.
38. 09:39:422 (1105,1106,1107,1108) - dkkd could follow the pitch of the music nicely.
39. 10:21:890 (1314,1315) - swap these notes to k d ? Similar reason as ^
40. 10:41:871 (1428) - change to k and move to 10:41:713 - , and change 10:41:634 (1426,1427) - to k and d respectively ? This could result in a better flow imo.
41. 10:45:003 (1443) - move to 10:44:950 - . A bit misplaced imo.
42. 10:45:318 (1444) - move to 10:45:266 - and change to k, ^
43. 11:17:090 (31) - consider adding finish here as well ? It needs more emphasis imo.

Sayaka- wrote:

Hi! M4M request via PM! hi o/

[Octaikon]

1. 01:04:293 (289) - this slider is a bit odd imo, change to two dons? - accepted
2. 01:33:882 (48) - k? follows the song better imo - ^
3. 02:36:513 (218,219,220,221) - there is no 1/6 in the song, change to 1/4? - I'll consider about this, not now. Because it kinda fits imo
4. 02:38:978 (242,243,244,245) - ^ - changed to another pattern, which fits the song a lot better.
5. 03:13:499 (463) - this slider is a bit short imo and doesn't really fit the song, change to notes? accepted
6. 05:21:994 (471,472,473,474) - there is no 1/6 in the song, change to 1/4? - There is
7. 05:34:026 (545,546,547,548) - ^ - ^
8. 05:45:417 (628) - yknow I hate finishers after 1/4s, so remove it? - changed to kkd D
9. 07:48:519 (202,203,204,205) - no 1/6 here, change to 1/4?
10. 07:49:153 (208,209,210,211) - ^
11. 07:51:214 (227,228,229,230) - ^ - Yeah smooooch part.. It is to follow the original song, I wanna keep it
12. 08:39:114 (640) - this slider is a bit short imo and doesn't really fit the song, change to notes? - changed to note

Couldn't find more, pretty good map! Thanks <3 Have a star! oh wait it's in graveyard, revive the map and I'll give you one!
Good luck! ;D

1. Kiai time comes most of the time on chorus and, when there's no chorus like on this map, when it feels like the climax of the song.
2. 02:42:102 - 02:47:362 - This is a break-like part. The kiai time feels really out of place. It's really short too. I think there's better parts to add a kiai than here.
3. 11:33:407 - End the kiai time.

• A marathon is really exhausting and your map has a high bpm and number of notes. Consider adding a bit more of breaks, especially on those parts (feel free to ignore this if you want though) :

1. 09:14:641 - 09:26:167 - Remove 09:18:272 (937) - ?
2. 07:55:016 - 08:38:799 - Come on, almost 1 minute without breaks, please have mercy. Leave a 1/1 break between each melody at least.

1. 08:39:114 (640) - I don't think a muted note is rankable. Or it shouldn't be. You should remove it, the map feels better with a break here anyway.

Kurosanyan wrote:

Hello~

[Kiai Time]

1. Kiai time comes most of the time on chorus and, when there's no chorus like on this map, when it feels like the climax of the song.
2. 02:42:102 - 02:47:362 - This is a break-like part. The kiai time feels really out of place. It's really short too. I think there's better parts to add a kiai than here. - Actually it was to fit the video, but since it was rejected(?) outta Charles' mapset and video file doesn't seem to fit taiko map.. so okay
3. 11:33:407 - End the kiai time. - Added non-kiai time at the end of the music instead.

[Breaks]

• A marathon is really exhausting and your map has a high bpm and number of notes. Consider adding a bit more of breaks, especially on those parts (feel free to ignore this if you want though) :

1. 09:14:641 - 09:26:167 - Remove 09:18:272 (937) - ? - No fix here, yes it'd be nice but I want to keep this fully-mapped
2. 07:55:016 - 08:38:799 - Come on, almost 1 minute without breaks, please have mercy. Leave a 1/1 break between each melody at least. - Deleted some notes. yeah it looks a bit harsh lol

[General Modding]

1. 08:39:114 (640) - I don't think a muted note is rankable. Or it shouldn't be. You should remove it, the map feels better with a break here anyway. - Fixed

This was just a fast, global check. I'll edit my post with a complete mod tomorrow.

Edit: Actually, I did another mod today and I'm going to map something, so I'll mod it as soon as possible but not today, sorry. D:

Edit2:
[Rest of the mod]

SPOILER

1. You should resnap your notes. They're probably off by ~1ms. This is a common bug happening all the time, and while it's not a really big deal, some notes on your map get a wrong SV or stuff like this. 00:14:843 (1) - For example. Use Beat Snap Divisor 1/12! This will avoid bad snapping for 1/3 and 1/6. You'll still get some notes snapped wrongly because it's a bit buggy around red timing points, so check AIMod after. - AIMod says nothing and the first note doesn't rly seem to be wrong
2. 00:33:225 (54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62) - It sounds more like D K D than K K K to me. Also D K D keeps consistency with all the previous D on the map.
   How about D ddd K kkk D or D kkd K ddk D (this one is the easiest to play). - oh yes you're right and it's now D ddk K ddk D
3. 00:39:471 (100,101,102,103) - dk kd sounds bad in my opinion (the kdk before a bit too). Personally, I think d kkd it the pattern that fits the best to the music here, but if you want to keep a 2 2 pattern, dd kd sounds fine too. ddkkd can be an option too. - changed to d kkd
4. If it was me, I would probably map 00:38:485 (92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100) - as d kkd d kkd d because it's a nice pattern and fits really well to the music and the d ddk k d ddk k that came before. - Fixed to different pattern.
5. 00:42:595 (122,123,124,125,126,127) - You can clearly hear that the vocal emphasis is at 00:42:759 - and 00:42:924 - so this dddk dd sounds really off. I think almost anything following the emphasis of those would be fine, but personally, I would suggest d ddkdd or ddd kdd. - Fixed to ddk kdd
6. 00:43:417 (129,130,131,132,133) - If you fixed my previous suggestion, I'd recommend to put a kkdkk here instead because it makes the flow and the playability way better, especially if you put d ddkdd before. - Changed to kkddk
7. 00:55:088 (218,219,220,221) - Same about the vocal emphasis, maybe try ddd k instead. I feel like it's okay if you don't, though. - Well, I think it's okay
8. 01:07:252 - add a k? I feel like the pattern should really end here. You can here the vocal here too. - Hmm, not really and it fits the vocal. "come on" sound is definitely in 1/4 snap so yeah
9. 01:12:348 (351,352,353) - D k D ? No particular reason, but D k D is easier than K d D and it sounds nice imo. - kinda followed background sound and rhythm
10. 01:21:061 (417) - d? Fits better imo. Not sure about it though. - Nope
11. 01:21:225 (417,418,419,420,421) - There's no real reason for a dkdkd here I think. Doesn't really fit well with the music. Also 01:21:554 - definitely sounds like the start of a k pattern. Personally I would go with something like ddddkkkkd. I would remove 01:21:307 (418) - too, because it feels a bit overmapped. - Changed to dkddkkkkd
12. 01:24:184 (446) - Sounds better as a k. Maybe ddkdd instead of dkddd for a better synergy with the following kkdkk? - Remapped the pattern, but sorry, not accepting your suggestion
13. 01:25:417 (458) - d? It would fit better with the following 2 ddk. OR You could consider to put 2 dkk after instead of 2 ddk, to fit to the dddkk, since those triplets should really fit with the quintuplet. - It was to follow Jack's voice, no change
14. 01:25:663 (460) - 01:26:321 (465) - 01:26:978 (470) - Same about those 3 notes, they should be the same to fit correctly with this part of the song. You should chose between 3 d and 3 k. If you go with dddkk dkk dkk for the previous suggestion, 3 k would be interesting. If you go with ddddk ddk ddk, 3 d would probably be better though. - Changed 01:26:321 (465) - to k
15. 01:30:924 (23) - 01:33:554 (46) - 01:36:184 (69) - for better consistency, I think going with k k k or d d d (or eventually k d k or d k d) would be better. - All of them are k now.
16. 01:43:992 - Add a k? It really feels like something is missing here. - emphasis for vocal
17. 01:46:047 (143,144,145,146) - A note at 01:46:129 - instead of 01:46:293 - would sound more natural in my opinion. - oh yes
18. 01:47:198 - Add a k? It fits to the drums, the vocals, the melody, everything. Also, without it, the flow is awfully broken. - accepted
19. 01:47:773 - 01:47:855 - I know you're following the vocals, but it would feel nice to put kk again for a nice pattern consistency. If you still want to focus on the vocals, a k only at 01:47:855 - would be nice too. It follows the vocal and avoid a broken flow again. - accepted
    
    I HAVE TO CHECK THE LAST AFTER - REMINDER
    Sorry, I lack time right now and have to do some other works too.
    
    
20. 01:51:800 (21) - d? I think the melody really ask for d k d here, while at 01:54:102 (40,41,42) - it asks for a d k k. It would be sad to make those two part which got different sounds with the same hitsound choice. - Following Jack's voice
21. 01:55:499 (52) - k? I feel like this would make and interesting pattern choice. You could go further and do this: 01:55:417 (51,52,53,54) - dkd k and 01:56:732 (63,64,65,66) - kdk d. - fixed
22. 02:04:293 (112,113) - I know you're following the "One Two Three Four" but consider putting d kkk here to follow the melody and the others patterns. - No.
23. 02:09:225 (1) - Just a really subjective suggestion, feel free to ignore, but I would put a x1,5 SV section for this spinner to avoid being so close to the kkdd. - It doesn't seem to be problematic
24. 02:18:924 (76) - D? The drums kinda sound like a finisher here. - Nope
25. 02:19:170 (78) - d? To fit with 02:18:595 (73,74,75) - and also, it sounds better imo. - remapped the pattern
26. 02:20:403 (85) - For fast/slow single notes, a finisher is better imo (because since they're big, it's easier to see them coming) and it's okay to put a K here. Also I would suggest x1,5. - No finisher but put 1.5x
27. 02:21:225 (89) - k? Fits better with 02:20:732 (86,87) - . - yep
28. 02:22:540 (100) - Same as before. Better pattern consistency. - nope
29. If you don't want to put those 2 k, for a good consistency putting a d at 02:23:033 (104) - would work too. - Hmm, no it doesn't fit
30. 02:24:430 (116) - d? Easier to play. The rhythm on this part sounds weird though. - okay
31. 02:27:636 (142,143,144,145) - ddd k again, for better consistency? - No. it was to fit rhythm
32. 02:35:444 - Add a note? Better flow, follows the music better. - accepted
33. 02:47:362 (291) - A finisher would be really nice here. - ^
34. 02:50:978 (317,318) - d K? - k K.
35. 02:53:937 (335) - 02:55:252 (341) - 02:56:567 (346) - Finishers to follow the music? Doesn't really make sense to start putting finishers at 02:57:882 (352) - - accepted
36. 02:58:540 (354) - 02:59:198 (357) - 02:59:855 (359) - Finishers here too. The finishers on this part of the song make an emphasis on the fact the song is gradually coming back after a break. - ^
37. 03:01:170 (365,366,367,368) - k k d d ? Feels better to play and sounds good too. This suggestion is even more important if you fix the next one. - No.
38. 03:01:828 (369) - Finisher? - ^
39. 03:02:814 (376,377,378,379,380) - kkddd ? For better consistency with 03:04:293 (389,390,391) - and I also think it's easier to play the following patterns with this. - Accepted
40. 03:04:869 (394) - Remove? Follow the vocals better this way imo. A k as for 03:10:129 (435) - Would be fine too. A d sounds weird. - nope
41. 03:09:143 - Add a note? - it doesn't seem to be needed
42. 03:13:499 (463,464) - Remove 463 and put a finisher on 464 to get an emphasis on the break and the drums ? - Later note is totally not to be put finisher
43. 03:15:554 (477) - and 03:16:869 (486) - sound totally off, snap them on the red tick before as you did for 03:18:102 (494) - please. Your pattern choice could have been interesting, but it doesn't fit the music, really. - Accepted for early one, no for later one.
44. 03:24:019 (15) - k to emphasis the pitch change and avoid to many kdkdkd...? - Nope, i'd rather keep consistency here
45. 03:24:184 (17) - If you'r going to put a k at 03:25:502 (25) - , 03:26:824 (33) - , etc. You should put a k here too. Or you could put a d on the other parts too, since 03:25:502 (25) - and 03:26:493 (32) - kinda sounds similar. - This is an exception to keep earlier pattern, i had no choice.
46. 03:24:184 - until 03:38:432 - the choice of hitsounds for the 2-2 patterns are a bit random and inconsistent, especially starting from. I would recommend to follow a pattern of hitsounds variation like 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 1 1 2, or 1 2 1 2 3 4 3 4 1 2 1, or 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3. - Good suggestion, but I don't think this part is really needed to fix
47. 04:15:854 (135) - I think k sounds better here. - Accepted
48. 04:58:091 - Add a k here? Maybe one at 04:58:010 - too. I don't know, this break sounds a bit weird to me. Maybe it's fine though. - y'know it's to follow Jack's voice.
49. 04:59:855 - Remove Ronald - huhh
50. 05:13:331 (395,396,397,398,399,400,401,402,403,404,405,406,407,408,409,410,411) - kkkdkkkddkkddkkdd sounds way better imo. - For me, too
51. 05:45:256 (627) - k? Sounds better and makes it easier to hit the following D. 05:44:936 (624) - d here would be nice too if you agree with the previous suggestion. - Nope
52. 05:56:406 - 05:57:529 - put notes here to keep following the vocals as you did for the others patterns? - slightly changed the pattern.
53. I actually recommend a bit of remapping from 05:47:984 - until 05:58:251 - . If you follow the fast 1/4 rythmic vocals (that sounds kinda like da da dadada da), you could add more notes (and remove some too) and make this part funnier to play. - changed a bit. I don't really think it's needed to remap

Oh god that's taking way longer than expected. I'll mod the other half tommorow... ;_;

Ok here we go again.

1. 06:33:064 (36) - You should move it to 06:32:903 - That's where the vocal emphasis is and it would fit waaaay better. - Accepted.
2. 06:38:839 - The volume change is unnecessary. This note is as loud as the rest, 88% audio should be fine. - k done
3. 07:21:114 - Add a note OR move 07:21:278 (22) - here. That's because you should continue to follow the melody+vocals rhythm you were following before for consistency. - Followed rhythm since 07:19:966 - . So no
4. 07:22:261 (26) - Sounds better as a d and better consistency. - Accepted
5. 07:56:444 (264) - k? dk k dk k easier than dk k dk d and it sounds better too imo. - ^
6. I think you need to put an emphasis to the difference between 08:58:851 (774) - and 08:59:009 (775) - if you want this part to sound right. - Nah, there's not even proper sound.
   That's why I'd suggest to do d ddd d k d k d for this part and for 09:00:904 (788,789,790,791,792,793,794,795,796) - too. The others part are fine. - No.
7. 09:07:220 (835) - This note is the only one that stayed as a d for the whole part. For consistency, you really should put a d here too. - You can notice music's mood changing since 09:07:220 - so no
8. 09:36:580 (1063) - 09:37:212 (1070) - For better consistency with the previous patterns and for a better playability, you should put k here instead of d. - Accepted
9. 10:23:555 (1310) - 10:25:766 (1323) - Those two notes seems like overmapping and they're break the rhythm of this part, you should remove it (or add notes on the red ticks before, but that would feel overmapped too imo). - I think that was okay.. but accepted.
10. 10:27:581 (1338) - A d would give a better consistency, fit better to the drums, fit better to the melody and fit better to the vocals, put a d please. - ^
11. 11:17:821 - and 11:18:041 - Add notes to follow the vocals and 11:18:114 (37) - k here for better consistency with 11:17:529 (34) - ? - This is just a no-no. I entirely followed the drums.
12. 11:24:699 (86,87,88) - k d K sounds better way better and has a better playability than d k K imo. - Accepted.
13. 11:33:407 (1) - Finish it at 11:36:846 - ? There's no sound after. - Accepted, also, thanks for your awesome mod.

OH GOD IT'S FINALLY OVER yay
*cries* dun crie kuro ;w;

(Even though my mod is long as hell, I still think your map is really nice. Good luck for ranking!) - Thanks! <3

bbj0920 wrote:

AIMod says nothing and the first note doesn't rly seem to be wrong

Kurosanyan wrote:

bbj0920 wrote:

AIMod says nothing and the first note doesn't rly seem to be wrong

The first note has the wrong SV, it comes faster than the next ones and than the white bar.

And AIMod isn't perfect. It can't detect notes off by 1ms.

After talking with other people (thanks Kaguya Hourain), it seems like there is a bug happening on the first tick of the first timing point of a map too.

That's why, to fix this, you have to use 13533 as an offset for your first timing point and the inherited timing point changing the SV.

This isn't the only snapping issue, but I think that's the only one that really matters.

Konpaku Sariel wrote:

와 39개나 열었는데 이런 어프맵을

00:16:155 (3,4) - ctrl + g

00:14:843 (1) - D - 이건 이미 괜찮아 보이네요.

00:18:614 (11) - k - ㄴㄴ.. 그래도 패턴을 좀 고치긴 했음

00:21:893 (16) - add d

00:28:787 (32) - add d

00:32:403 (51) - d

00:33:718 (60) - D - 각 피니셔의 음을 비교해 보시면 아실듯
00:33:882 (61,62,63) - kkd - 리듬 매핑..

00:37:663 (88) - d

----------------------

00:57:471 (240) - k
00:57:800 (243) - d - ㄴㄴ 이건 음이 높아지는 부분인데..
00:59:855 (260) - d - 옥타'곤↗'
01:01:828 (277) - k - 여기도 리듬 매핑
01:01:992 (278) - d - ^

01:09:636 (329) - k - 01:09:554 (329,331) - 가 강조되는 부분이라 해치고 싶지 않네요
01:09:718 (330) - d

01:09:965 (332) - delete

01:13:170 (354) - D - 리듬 매핑

01:13:828 (358) - d

01:14:485 (361) - D - ^

-----------------------

01:28:458 ~ 01:38:321

https://youtu.be/u-VzwETi59Q
이 악보 참조하시고

d_k_dkdkk_d_dkdk
d_k_dkdkk_D_D_K_(혹은 K_D_K 혹은 d_d_k 혹은 k_d_k)
d_k_dkdkk_d_dkdk
d_k_dkdkk_D_D_K_

d_k_dkdkk_d_dkdk
d_k_dkdkk_D_D_K_
d_k_dkdkk_d_dkdk
dKKDD___
(혹은DKKDD 아니면 DKKKD도 되고요)

- 좀 더 멜로디에 맞게 매핑했습니다. 리매핑 수준으로 수정 완료.
------------------------------

01:39:636 (97,99) - ctrl + G - "I'm↘ Oc↗ta→gon↘"
01:40:129 (100) - k - ^

----------------------

01:51:800 (21) - d - "Oh↑ Oh↑"

-----------------
02:45:225 (284) - add d
02:45:882 (288) - add d
03:13:499 (467) - delete
03:13:663 (467) - D - 피니셔를 넣을 구석이 없네요

-----------------------

03:24:184 ~ 03:38:432

k kd dk d k d이나
k dd dk d k d이나
k dk dk d k d이나
여러가지로 집어넣을수 있지만 넣더라도 2마디나 4마디정도는
같은 패턴으로 하시는게 통일성을 해치지 않습니다
이랬다 저랬다 하면 사람들이 햇갈려 짜증나 해요
특히 더블타임하는 사람한테는...

예를들어 이런식으로
03:24:184 ~ 03:26:493
여기까지 k kd dk d k d패턴
03:26:824 ~ 03:29:138
k dd dd d k d패턴

03:29:468 ~ 03:31:788
k kd dk d k d패턴
03:32:119 ~ 03:34:440
k dd dk d k d패턴

- 대폭 수정 완료
--------------------------------
03:50:458 (22) - k

04:21:101 (149) - k
04:23:724 (157) - k

------------------------

04:52:226 (257) - delete - 개인적으로 리듬을 살려준다고 생각해서 냅둠
04:52:308 (257,258) - ctrl + G

04:53:117 (261,262) - kk - kd
04:53:518 (264) - delete - _________________^
04:53:599 (265) - d
04:54:080 (267) - k
04:54:802 (271) - delete - _________________^

04:57:048 (286) - k
04:57:369 (288) - delete - 아실거라 믿습니다.

04:58:171 (293) - move to 04:58:091 - "Oc'ta'gon"

04:58:251 (294) - k - ^

-------------------------
06:13:652 (819) - k

06:13:973 (820) ~ 06:14:294 (822) - kdkdk - kkddk
06:14:454 (823) - d
06:14:936 (826) - k

06:15:256 (827) ~ 06:15:577 (829) - kdkdk - ^
06:15:738 (830) - d

---------------------------

07:44:272 (175) - delete
07:44:429 (175) - add d
07:44:507 (176) - add d
- "Three Two One"
-------------------------
08:48:588 (704) - k - 08:48:746 (703) - 이 08:48:588 (702) - 보다 훨씬 음이 높은데요?

---------------------
08:58:378 ~ 09:03:272
여기는 드럼음보다는 가사를 따라가는게 더 재미있을거같네요 더 잘들리기도 하고
d_ddd_d_k_d_k_d_
k_kkk_k_k_d_k_d_

드럼음을 따라가신다 하면
09:00:114 (784) - d
09:02:641 (802) - d

- 해머 레드존 초반은 리듬 베이스 매핑입니다. 09:00:114 (784) - , 09:02:641 (802) - 에 캇이 들어간 이유는 리듬을 해치지 않으면서 음이 높아진 걸 표현하려고 넣은겁니다.
------------------------
10:28:055 (1339) - D - 심벌즈 소리는 K

10:30:424 (1354) - d
10:30:581 (1355) - K
10:31:055 (1359,1360) - ctrl + G - kdk
10:31:371 (1361,1362,1363) - ddk - 멜로디 들어보시면 알듯

10:41:476 (1414,1415) - ctrl + G - 다른 패턴으로 바꾸긴 했어요
10:41:792 (1416) - d
10:42:424 (1422) - d - "Octagon↘"

----------------------
11:11:090 (2,3) - kk

11:11:894 (6) - add d - 아싸 이제 드럼 소리 완벽히 따라감 ㄳ

Niko-nyan wrote:

bbj the octagon oh no