Eien Parasites

00:01:500 (2,3) - I think these two can be active instead of 00:00:600 (3,4,5) - these. It would emphasize the pitch change of the guitar more with the density increase.

00:03:750 having this active would be nice because this sound is just as strong and important as 00:03:450 (1)

00:05:850 (15,16,1,2,3,4) - I think you could go for a similar rhythm choice here like 00:10:650 (1,2,1,2,3) - this one. It would put more emphasis on the guitar.

00:06:450 (2,1) - this movement is really uncomfortable because of the direction change and huge spacing. Maybe nerf it a bit..?

00:07:875 (6) - I don't think the stream direction change is necessary in this case, the song has no sound which should be emphasized on this note. I think completely removing the direction change (how you did in the first stream) should be okay.

00:10:125 (8,9) - I think having the direction change on the 9 would be nicer. It would emphasize the snare more.

00:14:400 (3) - I think it's reasonable to make a nc here. Kiai is starting on this note, the stream increases in spacing and changes direction.

00:18:750 (5) - Replacing this with two kickslider maybe? You would keep the density more, and you could add some different slidershape to the second kickslider to emphasize the guitar a bit better. Also would allow you to change 00:19:050 (1) - this into a bigger jump.

00:19:050 (1) - I'd honestly replace it with 2 circles to emphasise the strong drums here or at least make 00:19:200 active

00:19:200 (2) - move this circle on top of the third hitcircle in the stream? i can't even explain, just trust me it fits the music better. also i feel like 00:18:900 (6) - can be represented better with two hit circles instead as you represented the two 1/4 drums with hit circles here 00:18:450 (1,2) -

00:22:350 (3,4,5) - Visual spacing is a bit off. Maybe make 4 equally spaced between 3 and 5?

00:23:700 (10,1,2,3,4) - Maybe you could make these also equally spaced, so it looks more intentional. 00:24:000 (1,2) - the spacing between 1's sliderend and 2's sliderhead is way smaller than it is between 00:23:700 (10,1) - these two.

00:24:000 (1) - CTRL+G this slider? better distinction between vocals ... and more snappy movement to emphasize the NC and vocals in the music

00:24:600 (2,3,4) - could be buffed more since it's very underwhelming compared to 00:22:200 (2,3,4,5) - . Can buff sv and jump

00:26:700 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - I know you're going for the vocals here, but mapping some of the drums and the guitar inactively maybe?

00:39:900 (12) - I think mapping this as an active stream until 00:39:900 (12) - here and putting a kickslider to the end would transition the stream better into 00:40:200 (1,2,3) - this pattern. The kickslider would emphasize the guitar on on 00:40:050 - this tick slightly.

00:40:979 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2) - not a fan of this rhythm, I think starting with actives and then doing what you did with kicksliders here 00:44:979 (1,2) - would work better

00:40:979 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,1) - I really like this part c:

00:40:979 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,1) - you have some inconsistencies when differentiating between whether to use kicksliders or circles to represent the vocals/drums in this lil deathstream section. i would do something like this: (( https://pasteboard.co/yex35yZXwB2x.png )) for 00:40:979 (1,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2) - ... there are two distinct vocals that sound like he is moaning ... on the part of the song he is moaning more higher pitched, use a kickslider ... on the part where he is moaning deeper, use a stream. i understand it makes the map substantially harder, but as far as music representation, it fits much better.

00:43:912 (9) - Maybe replacing this one as a reverse slider so you have some emphasis on the loud snare?

00:51:245 (9,10,1) - maybe do smth like this for a bit more oomph

00:51:379 (1) - Mapping this actively maybe? Like how you did 00:50:579 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - here beforehand.

00:56:712 (9,10,11,12) - Maybe replacing this with a reverse slider, so the vocal gets more emphasis?

00:58:579 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - The spacing between these objects are not equal. I think having the visual spacing the same between the objects would make it look more intentional. Not applying this to the last note is also fine, spacing it further would give more emphasis to that loud snare. Something like this maybe? https://i.imgur.com/xuv7EzX.png

i think you want your stream to change direction here 01:00:978 (13) - instead of 01:01:245 (17) -

01:00:978 (13) - nc this maybe?

01:03:912 (8) - I think having just a kickslider would fit more, emphasizes the guitar a bit more. Having stacked active notes later on 01:04:179 (1) - this note should be fine then.

01:14:679 (1,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - oh hell yes

01:16:329 - having the vocal land on the tail here feels weird ngl, maybe swap 01:16:179 (1,2) - in the timeline?

01:16:629 (3) - I think moving this slider to the next white tick could emphasize the vocals a bit better. You can replace the object at 01:16:929 (4) - with it's sliderend, and you can add a note 01:16:629 - here instead

01:19:629 (3,4) - need more spacing in my life

01:25:779 (1) - Overlapping this is kind of underwhelming imo. You can make this into a bigger jump instead to the middle of the map for example.

01:29:679 - Maybe mapping this actively?

01:34:929 (2,3,4,1) - Visual spacing between 2 and 3, and 1 and 4 are not equal, this way it kind of looks unintentionally placed. I think making the visual spacing equal would make the pattern look better. You can also get 01:34:779 (1) - this note into the pattern so, 01:34:779 (1,4,3) - these three make a straight line maybe?

01:39:279 (2) - You could maybe make this into a slider emphasizing the vocal until 01:39:279 (2) - here?

01:45:579 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - dunno abt this one, speeding up the stream without changing directions plays weird if there isn't something backing it up in the music

01:47:979 (9) - nc here instead of 12 honestly

i'd also nc 01:50:379 (9) - instead of 01:50:979 (1) -

01:52:179 (4) 01:52:479 (1) - The distance between these notes should be similar to the distance between 01:54:279 (3) 01:54:579 (1)

02:04:479 (2,3,4) - This pattern leading into 02:04:779 (1,2) - flows together, but I feel like Ctrl+g both 02:04:779 (1,2) & 02:05:079 (1,2) - would fit better

02:07:779 (2,3,4) - Maybe spacing this triple equally away from the sliderend and the sliderbody?

02:14:829 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - the spacing of this stream is so similar to 02:10:779 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15) - this stream right before. I think it can be confusing pretty easily. Maybe you can make this into a scaling stream, that scales down in spacing? Something like this: https://i.imgur.com/rKq6SUQ.png

02:20:379 (4,5,6,7,8,9,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I think you're getting way too focused on the top right section of the playfield here. Maybe you could make 02:20:779 (8) - into a kickslider and move the following alt pattern to the other side? It would also give clearer visuals to the following pattern.

02:20:679 (7,8,9,1) - jesus! i get what you're going for but maybe ctrl+g 8 and 9 to make it flow better?

02:32:979 (1) - I think some clearer change in visuals would make the bpm change more readable. Maybe you could 02:32:979 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) - this stream also to a scaling stream, that increases in spacing?

02:34:179 (1,2,3,4) - I think you can make this inactive with repeat slider like you did with 02:33:879 (13) - this one. It would give more emphasis and focus to the following stream.

02:34:479 (1,2,3,4) - Maybe adding some curvature to this stream so 02:34:479 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,1,1,1) - these all are similar visually?

02:35:379 (1) - really a nitpick but having this little snickerdoodle in the middle of the loop looks off. i'd either make it smaller so there's nothing or bigger so there's a clear gap (pictured below)

02:36:579 (2,3,4,5) - Making this into an actual square maybe?

02:38:679 (1) - maybe move the grey anchors of this slider up a decent amount higher then the previous slider here 02:38:379 (3) - ... creates more distinction between the synth and more snappy movement. overall i like the way you represented the synth though :33

02:49:779 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - for such a musically distinctive and intense part of the song, the representation of objects you used feels lackluster in intensity. I would up the spacing between the 1-2 combo sliders and up the difference in slider speed between the two objects

02:51:879 (2) - this guitar sound ends at 02:52:179 so why not make the slider end there as well?

02:57:779 (1,2,4,5,1) - I think it's getting a bit too crumped over here. Maybe you could rearrange these object so you get more clearer visuals? Something similar to 03:00:979 (1,2,3,4,5) - this one.

03:05:779 (1) - i feel like the sliderend here should be active because it's kinda underwhelming

03:11:579 (3) - i feel as if a more rigid and abstract slider similar to 03:10:829 (1) - would fit better. the distinction and difference in slider design feels off for such similar sounding parts of the music

u could do what you did here 03:18:479 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - for 03:13:679 - to be consistent

03:36:779 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - why spacing so big D:

03:39:629 (7,8,9,10,11,12,13,1,2,3,4,5,6) - you represented the vocals with kicksliders here YET here 03:40:979 (6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5,6) - it seems like you gave up LOWKEY. As tedious as it is to remap this section, the inconsistencies between musical representation is problematic. I would (as you previously did) represent all the changes in vocals with kicksliders (of course using streams for long-lasting vocals)

03:48:779 (2) - This can be an active triplet. Something similar to 03:47:429 (1,2,3,4) - this maybe?

03:50:579 (1) - Maybe mapping more of the triples in this section, either actively or inactively?

03:54:779 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - as there are very distinct 1/2 sounds here, I believe it's better fit to represent this section with either kicksliders OR more harsh and angular spacing between each 1/2 note. in simpler terms either (like I said use kicksliders) or put 2 1/4 circles close together then a large space in between and so forth and so on. You could also use 4 1/4 circles close together, then high-spacing or snappy movement (or both) to represent the other 4 1/4 circles.

04:00:179 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - the rough angle change makes it play way harder than 03:54:779 - and 04:05:579 -

04:02:579 (1,2) - is represented with a kickslider leading to a circle whilst 04:03:779 (1,2,3) - is represented with a 3-note burst, yet the music is very similar in both parts of the song. I believe you should just stick to a 3-note burst to represent this part of the music.

I see why you didn't but I'd just start the kiai here 05:04:979 -

05:06:179 (1,2,3) - After checking in Audacity, I think this part is actually 1/6 rhythm. If that's the case you can actually replace the last repeat slider with active streams. Would be epic.