R U 4 Me? (Cut Ver.)

Will respond through other set

For the first post, ill just repost what I said on the other set:

"I agree with this post. However here are my thoughts:
Going for both my set (because the same post was linked on my set) and my opinions of this set, I find the simplified groupings of the circles on 00:48:695 (1,2,3,4) then followed up with a 1/2 slider on 00:49:217 (5) to be more interesting then having sliders. I personally do think and agree that 1/2 sliders are more fitting however, I also think that the contrast of slider to circle ratio changing as the song progresses to be good as well."

When it comes to the section at 00:57:101, I understand your point on trying to follow the guitars a little closer, however I made a switch to following the drums because I felt that it is much more impactful of a transition especially as a peak in intensity.

For the 2nd post, I may have read this wrong but I feel that nerfing the density doesn't make too much sense imo because yes the calmer sections would consist of 1/2 rhythms, but they are passive compared to the stronger sections that would have much more active rhythms.

Tracking discord convo here:

"I realize you were trying to follow the guitar, but the execution doesn't really reflect that
The guitar rhythm is syncopated at times, so while 00:49:145 (4,5) - works and lines with the guitar, 00:48:884 (2,3) - doesn't

Doesn't line up with the guitar 00:52:797 (2,1) - 00:53:841 - ,
Lines up with the guitar 00:53:971 (1,2,1,2) -

for the thing at 57s, you can just change ur ncing and patterning slighntly and the rhytmh is fine
00:56:580 -

like that follows the syncopation so much better"

KeyWee ended up not wanting to change, so going to close this out since we were unable to come to an agreement.

Gl with the remainder of qualified!

a

yea

a

a

i forgor

a

ty

that set is a different drain so imma figure out how to cut it

a

a

a

no

erm stop abusing bn perms :nerd: