00:01:503 (3) - it’s rather just my preference, but for this song you can make such sliders smooth
what i mean
https://i.imgur.com/qtYcIx0.png
https://i.imgur.com/sn5OmB2.png
just make this red anchor more linear with extreme whites
00:01:503 (3) - this could be split into a 1/1 slider and then a circle like what you did on 00:04:619 (1,2) - ,since it seems like you're following vocals and this doesnt catch the vocal on 00:01:892 -
00:01:758 (1) - 00:06:433 (1) - would space these away from previous circles so that you can give emphasis to the chord sound here
took the first suggestion. I feel like the two notes before 00:06:433 (1) is enough to emphasize that sound
00:07:992 (3,4,5) - recommend ctrl g on this so that you can actively map the stronger piano sound 00:09:161 and that way you also have quieter piano sounds passively mapped
Initially planning to accept, but the original felt better because it expressed the vocals well. Not sure if it's what I am supposed to be emphasizing tho
00:12:277 (5,6,7) - 1/4 spacing here feels really tight, I think youcould space the overlaps a bit more to represent the higher pitched melody here (something like this or similar https://imgur.com/a/f8cIyM3)
could also nc 00:12:667 (7) - to represent break in the rhythm
00:14:763 (2,3,4,5,6) - you could reduce this spacing a bit since the pianos' pitch is not as high as 00:15:482 (1,2,3,4,5) - gets and it's gradually changing
00:15:047 (6) - increase spacing on this a little bit as its alot more intense than 00:14:868 (5) - yet they both have the same spacing, x:286 y:99
00:16:484 (1) - space this more for emphasis~ there is a loud sound and its underwhelming right now~ you can stack the red node on this 00:15:227 (1,2,3) -
00:21:155 (5) - you could turn this into a 2 1/2 sliders and 00:21:874 - 00:22:053 - 2 circles here to follow the vocals~
00:23:925 (3,4,5) - recommend stacking (4,5) instead so that you can group vocals with your stacks consistently like 00:26:260 (2,3,4,5) -
00:20:512 (2,3) - 00:21:230 (4,5) - these could be stacked too for the same vocal sounds, less movement in the calm section would be nice
00:25:362 (9) - there's nothing to be extended here, a 1/2 slider would do it's job just fine, there's both vocal and instrumental sounds present on the red tick
also 00:24:823 (6,7,8) - have similar sounds so the spacing being too different between them gives a weird impression towards your pattern
00:27:622 (7) - Since the vocal on those 2 1/2 notes is more intense than maybe you could change it to 2 circles to make the change in vocal stand out
00:28:596 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,1,2,3,4,5) - spacing could definitely be reduced here, music doesn't really call for this much. I think you could also reduce the density since some weaker sounds don't deserve much clickability, e.g: 00:28:596 (1,2) - 00:29:135 (1,2) - could be turned into 1/2 sliders
Since this is the buildup, I feel like the spacing here is fine. The difficulty starts ramping up afterwards immediately and this section is more intense than the next as well.
00:29:494 (3) - would make much more sense to NC this and 00:30:033 (3) - instead following the instruments' pitch
00:40:556 (2) - make slider 1/1 or 5/4 and place circle on 00:41:095 to better emphasise the snare
00:51:230 (4,5,6,7,1) - would space the stream to the left a bit more so that the jump and movement doesn't feel underwhelming compared to your faster sv
00:56:799 (2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2) - the way you map these stream rhythm are nice but you make 3 separate spaced streams with 3 different spacing. While the intensity of each is different, you can represent it in other ways for example turning 00:57:877 (2,3,4) - into a stack triplet because right now seeing 3 1/4 rhythms with all slightly different spacing just look off.
and 00:58:416 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - pattern looks pretty off too, the way it's spaced into a short 1/4 slider just seems off.
two circles out of stream is a little straining there. I believe increasing slider speed to 1.35 on that slider should have the same desired effect
00:58:955 (2) - this is a sharp sound which I think you could space something like this to emphasise a bit more, the linear flow feels a bit underwhelming https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/14929557/86f9
00:59:239 (1,2,3,4) - i think you could make this a 3/4 slider leading in to the stream on 00:59:598 (1,2,3,4) - . the stream there doesnt follow the piano as its on a different snapping, and i think it would be nice to give 00:59:598 (1,2,3,4) - 's stream some emphasis
00:59:958 (1,2) - make first slider 1/2 slider and place circle on 01:00:227 to better represent the double the snare does instead
01:00:482 (2) - would remove this and extend 01:00:213 (1) - to the blue tick. you haven't overmapped any blue ticks anywhere else in the section so just feels out of place
your approach in the kiai for instances like 01:00:572 (2,3,4) - 01:12:069 (2,3,4) - is much more representative of the song than the jumps used afterwards 01:02:009 (2,3,4,5,6) - 01:03:446 (2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4) - 01:13:506 (2,3,4,5,6) - 01:14:943 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5) -.
for most of them, the sounds are not equally strong, and it helped the vocals to have those as sliders;
01:13:506 (2,3) - for example, 2 is way stronger and more impactful than 3, 01:13:865 (4,5) - in the other hand has the same drums so it's whatever to have a jump like that, but when mixing those in a similar pattern it just feels weird
I guess this is what I felt added the best variety to the song, since obviously there isn't 1 correct way to map vocals and having the same type of emphasis would be very very repetitive. Say I did change the 2 on 01:13:506 (2,3) as a slider, but for variety I changed the next two notes to jumps. There isn't a particular reason why the 3,4 is stronger either. I also think jump patterns effectively emphasize different sections of the vocals, since as I'm playing the song you cant say the change in angle of 01:13:865 (4,5) doesn't subtly change the thematics.
01:05:153 - 01:16:650 - there are drum sounds here just like 01:17:009 (7) - 01:05:512 (7) -, it doesn't make sense to ignore them when you are using triples to cover stuff that aren't even audible in the song like 01:04:434 -
I guess that was a one time case, since 01:04:344 (1,2,3) was what I would consider the first peak of the song and it is acceptable to use triplets to emphasize downbeats for these cases. As for those two parts, I pick and chose which drums to follow in the song based on if the vocals were better to emphasize here, just to decrease some density since there are so many drums in the song and it would too uncomfortable to play. For instance, alongside those two cases, I also didn't map the drums for 01:06:500 because I personally saw a shift to vocals (while still covering most of the drums).
01:06:320 (3,3) - maybe make these 1/2 sliders + 2 circles so that you can cover the drum pattern here since it stands out, feels underwhelming skipping over them
also add a circle here for the same reason 01:07:308
01:17:817 (5,3) - same idea with these but having 1/2 sliders instead of 3/4 so you can cover red tick drums
I took the first suggestion. However, i want to keep the second slider as a 3/4 because the vocals in this part are stronger than the first and there would be nothing to make them stand out otherwise.
01:23:566 (1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - current nc's are really inconsistent here you are nc'ing to different sounds each time.
if you are trying to nc per strong string sound, then delete all current nc's in timestamp and have nc's on 01:23:925 (1) - 01:24:644 (3) - 01:25:362 (1) - 01:26:081 (3) - which have more noticeable and consistent sounds on them
01:23:925 (1) - think you nc'ed by accident since it's not a 1-2 rhythm and other combos are consistent
01:26:799 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5) - I like the increased spacing here for the strings but maybe a sharper turn to the stream would work nicely to emphasise it a bit more clearly. something like this https://imgur.com/a/hE74bjQ
01:27:622 (1,2,3) - this could be more spaced away from 01:27:263 (5) - . People may think its a 1/2 gap instead of a 1/1 gap