no. 00:02:668 (9,10,11) - all of these have the same pitch, which is "mi" in sol-fa name scale.
00:09:023 (27,28,29,30,31) - Same reason as muzukashii: 00:09:225 (23) - 00:10:036 (25) - I had a thought if you could change these notes to k for more conistancy and emphasis on the 00:09:023 (22) - 00:10:239 (26) - vocals.
00:10:776 (32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39) - I think dkkddkdk could fit better here considering vocal pitches
00:11:455 (35) - 00:11:860 (37) - Emphasize those "strong" vocals more please, like 00:11:455 (35,36,37) - use dkd or something.
00:11:789 - Maybe you could change for k to recall the kdkdk patterning a bit earlier (00:07:735 (22,23,24,25,26) - )
00:13:006 (42,43) - This is just only a kick sound. There is not have a noticeably finisher sound like 00:13:411 (44,45). So I suggest to remove the finisher for these notes hence.
00:14:121 (48) - Maybe I agree with Nifty here. It seems that you have followed the vocal here, but I'd suggest you to focus on a clearer vocal and keep consistent with Poii's difficulty. Also, I think it's unecessary for a doublets because it looks odd in this difficulty.
00:14:212 (48) - no reason for this to be here, there's like a breathing sound or something but honestly that ain't enough.
00:15:124 (52,53) - change to k, because the vocal has a high pitched voice here. and 00:15:529 (54) - change to d.
00:15:529 (54) - has an even higher-pitched sound. In fact its the most highest among these six notes, therefore it should be kat. And so, keeping 00:15:124 (52,53) - as don in order to emphasize 00:15:529 (54) -
I did not use triple at 00:20:908 (80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88) - so I go for parallel density.
00:15:934 (56,57) - ctrl+g because of the rhythm
00:23:029 (85) - change to d - https://i.imgur.com/BfQ7vzX.png
00:17:131 (60) - I really don't like that you missed this beat right here. Add a note here 00:17:131 - and change this note to k 00:17:333 (61) - to distinguish the beat from the vocals.
00:20:394 (74) - is mapped in order to show the continuing hi-hat sound of 00:20:191 (73) - . and work to show the increased intensity of the music.
00:22:938 (89,90) - better put them as d for vocal downpitch and you don't need contrast between 00:23:141 (90,91) - cuz they don't sound that strong
00:26:181 (105,106,107) - Change to ddd for a better emphasizing in 00:26:789 (109). Also, it will enforce the vocal to be similar with 00:26:587 (108).
I want to make these finishers like 00:26:860 (110) - to be separated by 1/2 notes. So I decided not to map so
00:26:880 (103) - Make this k to emphasize the "ahh" which is also higher pitched than the note before it
No it's don. Due to the offset change, it shows the wrong notes in the editor. He is referring to 00:26:860 (106) -
00:29:425 (120,121,122,123,124,125) - Maybe make them reversed (like kdd dkk)? Since it's kinda the same guitar, but second is way stronger
00:29:516 (114) - change to d, 00:29:718 (116) - k because the drum. 00:30:124 (119) -d, the same, and maybe you can try to change 00:29:921 (117,118) - to k for a smooth pattern.
00:29:516 (114,115,116,117,118,119) - Following the dominating guitar sound here, and the ending kat (00:30:124 (119) - ) correspond to the vocal sound well.
00:39:762 - doesn't really go well with the change in vocal to just have this in the middle of some d d d pattern. could utilize 00:39:661 - to make a triple like https://i.imgur.com/AeYJBqB.jpg, or delete 00:39:560 - to get https://i.imgur.com/ZlhMPEb.jpg
00:42:195 (184) - This should be k for consistency. It has same drum sound as 00:41:587 (181,182)
00:46:948 (195,196) - ctrl+g
00:54:448 (228) - change to d. i think it's better
01:22:016 (350) - change to d
my conclusion, your map's flow was great. i was so inspired.
00:46:948 (195,196) - ctrl+g doesn't fit in my opinion.
For 00:54:448 (228) - , changing will make the flow weird.
01:22:016 (350) - It is already d
But I appreciate your effort. Thanks for the help!
I want to create the pattern 00:47:739 (198,199,200,201,202,203,204,205,206) - having a kat after it also makes it notable to players
00:52:735 (234) - why no finisher zzz, please, it's as intense as the others so put a finisher > <
00:54:448 (228) - mapping it a kat as to show the increased pitch of the chord from the background music.
Want to structure this part though 01:05:577 (292,293,294,295,296,297,298,299,300,301,302,303) - . I shall keep it
01:06:519 (299,300,301,302,303) - ddkdd suit better in my opinion for contrast with the vocal while following the drum
01:06:610 (282) - make finisher usage here apparent, this feels like a random finisher but if you make 01:07:624 (288,289,291) - and 01:05:799 (279) - finished as well it doesn't.
01:07:330 - finisher usage here is wonky, this vocals has no emphasis except the vocal, but the two 1/2 after it have both cymbals, but only one has a finisher. Consider making 01:05:911 (298) - a finisher since it has a cymbal, removing 01:07:330 (305) - and making 01:07:735 (307) - a finisher, idk how you should pattern it but you can figure it out.
01:13:816 - change for k? to make a contrast since the vocal gets more intense there. Pitch is also quite similar to 01:14:222 -
It'd recall 01:17:060 (353,354) - imo
01:18:276 (356,357) - The vocal started at point 01:18:276, has faded out at 01:18:681. for expressing it, how about swapping these except finish hitsound?
01:23:546 - k? So that will make 01:22:330 (369,370,371,372,373,374) become more consist to 01:19:087 (358,359,360,361,362,363)
01:23:546 (373) - Something special reasons to use k, even though there is nothing to emphasize?
01:28:411 (394) - 01:30:033 (401) - Similar as above. but they actually have some melody, so you may don't need to care about this.