00:01:482 (1482|0) - perhaps you meant to put this on 00:01:518 - instead? there's really no definitive sound on this 1/3rd tick which is why it's a bit of an odd placement rn.
btw moved 00:01:840 (1840|0) to col 2 since I want to give the same impression as on 00:13:625
00:01:832 (1832|1) - not a huge deal but you could rearrange a bit and make this a 1/2 LN since there's a continuation of the snare "drumroll" (not sure what to call it lol
00:12:338 (12338|1,12338|0,12766|3,12766|2) - personally i think you could stack these like this http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/15918101/812d instead of how they are rn. I know it's trying to follow suit with the other doubles by alternating 12 and 34 but since this is the start of a new section, for me I think it'd be better to differentiate them a bit since I think not only do the notes I mentioned sound similar, but it indicates that's a new section by switching up the doubles a bit doing so. i hope this makes sense lol.
00:30:554 (30554|3,30982|3) - perhaps of emphasizing the drum hits/rolls with just 1/1 notes, how about utlizing 1/1 LNs instead so you can capture the entire drumroll? since it's pretty noticeable as well and hard to ignore. like so: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/15710914/64a2
if you agree with me here, same thing here as well 00:35:697 (35697|2) - where u can put a 1/1 LN 00:35:482 - here
01:52:625 (112625|2) - same idea with this one, I think this is important considering how the drumroll really stands out here as well.
00:34:195 (34195|2) - small suggestion but perhaps u could have this on column 4 instead since u don't many notes here in this column for this portion and so it doesn't feel completely dead lol
00:54:338 (54338|2,54338|3) - I think this would be better on the left hand with some rearranging of the surrounding notes like so: http://osu.ppy.sh/ss/15918119/d724
I think the doubles at least should get a noticeable change anyways since the pitch is incredibly different and I think for that reason, it's just a bit odd to have them on the same hand, though I get why you made it like that to begin with. I think this would be nice in this case anyways since the suggestion I offered makes the notes descend in pitch quite nicely, 34 into 23 into 12. :)
01:17:268 (77268|2) - this would be better on column 4 imo since this isn't very similar with these 01:16:840 (76840|2,77054|2) - notes that are also in the same column, would be good if you gave them some differentiation between the two sounds anyways to show that they aren't the same imo.
01:19:088 (79088|2,79195|3,79409|3,79623|2) - i definitely recommend changing this up a bit, this is some serious right hand bias for a normal diff and I think this is a bit tricky to play here, considering the 1/4th to the 1/2 change might be hard for new players.
01:53:480 (113480|0) - , 01:54:338 (114338|2) - , 01:55:195 (115195|0) - , 01:56:052 (116052|2) - , 01:56:909 (116909|0) - , 01:57:766 (117766|2) - , 02:00:338 (120338|1) - , 02:01:195 (121195|3) - , 02:02:052 (122052|1) - , 02:02:909 (122909|3) -
all these LNs are horribly off. the sound they're following is only realistically 1/2 of a measure, so it's pretty noticeably off for example when the LNs are like 1/1s, since for another 1/2 of measure there's no sound followed after to begin with. with that, I think it would be weird if all the LNs were 1/2s since some of them were like 3/4th LNs. so in that case, I would suggest you'd make them doubles like you had done previously but I can compromise on something else if you'd like.
if you agree with me, these need to be changed as well:
02:34:623 (154623|0) -
02:35:480 (155480|2) -
02:36:338 (156338|0) -
02:37:195 (157195|2) -
02:38:052 (158052|0) -
02:38:909 (158909|2) -
02:39:766 (159766|0) -
02:40:623 (160623|2) -
02:44:909 (164909|1) -
02:45:766 (165766|3) -
02:03:766 (123766|1,123980|1,124088|2,124195|1,124409|2,124623|1,124730|2,124945|1,125052|2,125266|2) - this might be a little too rough for a normal and I don't think this would fly since it's so heavily indexed here. I can compromise though if you made 02:03:766 (123766|1,123980|1,124088|2,124195|1,124409|2) - this explicitly columns 2 and 3 and 02:04:623 (124623|1,124730|2,124945|1,125052|2,125266|2) - this 1 and 4, or perhaps vice versa. as is though I don't think can fly at this kind of BPM unfortunately.
02:12:340 (132340|2,132768|2,133197|2,133625|2) - small suggestion but it might be even better to try and let the LNs alternate different columns here, considering how the sounds here switch off with different pitches, from high to a bit of a lower pitch in sound.
02:20:480 (140480|0,140695|1) - perhaps u could flip the columns to these notes here, since personally the way it is right now is that this looks like a continuation of 02:20:909 (140909|2,141123|3,141338|2) - which should definitely be avoided.
02:34:195 (154195|3,154195|2) - I think this would work a bit better as a single 1/1 LN actually, since I don't think the double is totally needed but that short 1/1 synth (?) I feel like is pretty noticeable and should definitely be captured with an LN in this case.
02:41:480 (161480|0,161909|2) - , 02:43:195 (163195|3,163623|1) - perhaps this is just me (yet again lol) but I don't think these particularly need to be emphasized with 1/2 LNs (?) idk they just seem kinda out of place considering how the rest of your LNs when came to these sounds particularly were either 1/1 or 3/4 so for me anyways they seem kinda random. i would just make them regular notes in this case.
more synths are added from 02:41:480 - so I started with doubles, then I proceeded to add 1/2 LNs to integrate the samples into the chart. how about I remap the segment starting from 02:44:909 - like the preceding one?
the change would look like this: https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/15921927/833d
the highlighted LN not being a double is because the synth gets fainter right there.
02:47:480 (167480|0,167588|3,167695|0) - minor suggestion but i think this would be better separated on 2 and 3 rather on 1 and 4. mostly because the sampling at this part is different than the stuff at 02:46:623 (166623|0,166730|3,166838|0,167052|3,167159|0,167266|3) - where as the one being mentioned has that 'FUCK OFF!' sample here, it's just good use of contrasting the different sample through column placements essentially.
02:47:482 (167482|0,167590|3,167697|0) - seeing as how you emphasized this part with just 3 consecutive 1/4th notes here for this part in particular, 02:47:590 (167590|3) - you could probably delete this note tbh since I don't think it holds much of a strong importance to what you're focusing to begin with and slowing it down at 25% kinda blatantly shows that. would just be better if the note was removed imo.
here I'm focusing on the syllables I hear from the sample (low pitched one).
actually it should be packed with 1/4 notes until 02:47:697 if I were to follow those syllables, but that'll make a full blown 1/4 stream so I have this current version on hand.
and... no I don't think the sound at 02:47:590 is negligible enough.
03:01:623 (181623|1,181623|2) - i'd probably just make these 1/1 here just for the sake of simplicity. though the sound your following is indeed 3/4ths of the measure, I'd still argue there's some sound for that 1/4th bit to where it'd be noticeable when playing. im not usually against stuff like this but i think just for the sake of being a Normal diff, might be better to just extend these just a tad.