00:07:898 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,3,1) - Really strange to map the 1/4 for 00:02:688 (1,2,3) 00:05:530 (2,3,4) but then completely ignore it for the 2nd measure here
All the 1/2 rhythm spam is also super repetitive in comparison, probably should map the little string sounds in here as well
00:08:227 (4,1,2,3) - this amount of 1/4 is kinda a lot given that this is not supposed to be the most intense part of the map at all, would maybe just have 00:08:227 (4) - not be 1/4
00:14:846 (6,1) -this should not be so visually similar to your 1/4th throughout the map especially where you just used alot of triples with this same kind of spacing, its breakign a guideline, just make it different some how
00:24:320 (3,4,5) - The motion here plays kinds wacky compared to 00:23:056 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) which is all pretty linear
Could change it up a bit to match the rest of the section
00:30:004 (1,2,3,4,5) - The 2 + 2 + 1 circle rhythm makes sense for 00:26:846 (1,2,3,4,5) given the context of the vocals but doing the same thing here kinda ruins the effect
Could swap 00:30:320 (3,4) for a 1/2 slider or do something similar so they aren't identical
00:34:741 (3,4,5) - Probably could swap one of these 1/2 sliders for a 1/2 circles since the slider spam here is really lame for the strongest vocals especially when the lead up vocals 00:33:162 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2) are a bunch more difficult
Could swap 00:33:477 (2,3) 00:34:425 (1,2) for a 1/2 slider for a the same reason
00:43:267 (1,2,3) - This is super overspaced for a hard diff, looks like stuff you'd see in an insane diff
All the slider spam for 00:41:688 (3,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,3,4,1,2) is also really boring to play so 00:44:530 (1,2) as circles could be cool
Ya like compare this to 02:54:635 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) for the other collab part which is much more appropriate for a diff like this
00:48:162 (4) - Can you not make the downbeat 00:48:320 passive :(
The 1/1 gap between 00:48:162 (4,1) is also pretty troll since it kinda ruins the start of the new section
00:56:227 (4,1) - 01:01:279 (4,1) - 01:06:332 (2,1) - change to an overlap to represent 1/1 like in the preceding part so ppl dont get confused
More of a personal thing I guess but the overlaps for 01:03:477 -> 01:12:951 make this feel a bit too similar to a normal diff
Wheras just lowering the spacing slightly ie. https://i.imgur.com/So0zurl.png feels more apt for a diff like this
01:09:174 (1,2,3,4,5,1) - & 01:11:700 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - yeaaaaaaaaa these are definitely too dense in 1/2 given that the music rn hardly exists at all
01:11:056 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Kinda lost on what this rhythm is trying to follow
Something like https://i.imgur.com/uEmY5Oc.png makes sense for vocal rhythm but current feels like you're swapping between vocals/some random background layer
An extension of #3580023
01:43:898 -> 01:53:846 seems to swap between the melody instrument ie. 01:43:898 (1,2,3,4) and the drums (?) ie. 01:44:846 (1,2,3,4,5,6) which makes the rhythm overall in the section really awkward
Might need to rework the rhythm as a whole in here, would make sense to follow the melody since imo it's the primary focus of the music here over the drums
Whole section could use a density/spacing nerf too it feels a bit too ham for how quiet the section is overall
Could incorporate some more 2/1 sliders or something
01:53:372 (1,2,3,4) - 2 + 2 stacks doesn't really capture the music very well here
Especially since the pitch change on 01:53:688 (3,4) is pretty noticeable compared to 01:53:688 (3,4) which are more similar
Could unstack these?
03:14:846 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - 1/4 makes more sense for 03:15:083 rather than 03:15:635 (4,5,6)
You don't have any sounds on 03:15:714 worth including + ignoring 03:14:846 (1,2) clashes with the rest of the section