oops was talking about spinnerends. because there is no sound where the spinner ends so it doesn't make sense to have an audible hitsound there (will only reopen here) also: hs should always be applied and checked using default skin or a skin that doesn't include hitsounds since that's also how they will be judged by bns (not sure if you did this so i wanted to mention it)
How even suppose to mute the spinnerend ? There's still have audible sound at the spinner end. I'm not sure what point are you on about. Does the spinner needs to have HS??
00:07:653 (2) - Wouldn't have been better to make a slider into blue tick? I would love to hear your reasoning on this
The blue tick is a bit early if you listen properly tho. Even the ranked version also snap on white tick on this one. lul
00:09:486 (1) - Probably a mistake, but what about make it start like Hard on 00:09:403 - ?
00:11:986 (1) - Would this rhythm suit better? https://i.imgur.com/fAzAmHz.png I didn't feel what you made had emphasis on the piano or mainly the BG music. Would help emphasize the piano on the downbeat
00:16:486 (5) - This Rhythm? https://i.imgur.com/8RVewel.png You're mainly mapping vocals here on each emphasis on her voice is clickable. Can do the same as well as blending with the piano
00:16:819 (6,1) - i personally don't like it when half beats are stacked on the beginning of a stream or burst as i often misread it as 1/4.
No reason to stop the flow by stacking here. Either unstack it or follow 00:19:486 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - as they have the same exact beat. You are adding "difficulty" for no reason when this section of the song have no momentary pause especially the vocal
it has the reason why I stack here. It's because to satisfy the vocal beat from 00:15:153 (1) until 00:16:986 (7)
00:17:653 (2,3) - This feels a bit weird to play. Perhaps CTRL+G the slider?
00:18:653 - This break in the music seems strange. It skips a piano on 00:19:319 making the stream lose a lot of impact and it's not the leading sound that makes this part emphasized. Emphasis are on 00:19:319 (3) - and 00:19:986 (1) -
00:18:319 (1,2) - I think this part is enough to make an impact before 00:19:319 because it would make less impact if I map the piano sound as the sound doesn't support much on the snare sound (stream part)
00:19:486 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - This doesn't snap to anything? What are you mapping here? I don't hear anything when slowed down to 25%.
what do you mean by doesn't snap anything? There's a major snare drum sound on this timeline.
Similar to what I've mentioned about stacking in 00:16:819 (6,7) - . Unstack them like https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/IBt2lCxE following the continuous flow of the vocal
00:27:153 (2) - There's plenty of places like this that I've noticed throughout this beginning section that seems to have been undermapped. There's clearly audible snares that would've definitely called for short 5 note streams or repeating sliders here, but instead there's just a 1/2 slider here instead. If vocal emphasis is your goal then I guess this kind of "ignoring background sounds" emphasis is okay but overall it just doesn't feel right to me. I won't bother listing everything as it's basically everywhere in this section.
Audible snares at 00:27:319 (3,4) . I don't think it feels undermapped enough because I emphasize the vocal and snare sound to give more impact on the map rather than map the background song
00:27:403 (3,4) - Did this here but skipped the same noticeable sound 00:28:486 (2) -But it's probably the rhythming your using to keep it consistent
00:31:153 (2,3) - make this a slider + 2 circles. otherwise it doesn't play like 2 beats at the end since a sliderend is only passive
I don't want to repeat the same rhythm like 00:29:819 (2,3,4) and the other parts that relative with this rhythm because it feels lame.
00:32:486 (2,3) - inconsistent rhythm. Should follow 00:27:153 (2,3,4) - because of the obvious 1/4 duplets
00:33:319 (1,2) - The 1/4 jump used here is a bit too big compared to the previous one , which were stacked. I'd suggest ending 00:33:319 (1) - on the red tick to make it more consistent with before
00:34:403 - Don't get why you would ignore such an obvious drum here. https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/h6J7Xxpj
Ok. I almost hear the triples but there's a reason why the triples is not valid at this part. It's because the drum with triples isn't audible enough and it's not strong to support the song. Minor people would think that why it should be triple since there's no reason to make triples at here. So, I decided not to make triples instead and make back and forth jump like 00:33:653 (2,3,4,5,6,7) to represent the density of the song. To sum of it, it can cover the 'triples' sound as you heard on that
Pretty weak reasoning. Don't use excuses like not "audible" enough when these examples have wayyy less audible than the drums here. Example: 00:27:403 (3,4) - , 00:40:486 (2,3,4) - , 01:03:486 (3,4) - , 01:04:153 (2,3) - . Basically most of the triples you've mapped. Why don't the drums here share the same treatment? Just to make sure you could map a continuous back-forth jump pattern while ignoring the obvious drum? (Do not compare with other maps as their rhythmic choice is a lot different than yours). Pro tips: Max your Music and Master volumn to 100%, the hitsound to 0%.
dude, all the examples you mention are AUDIBLE!!!. I don't HEAR triples on 00:34:403. "Don't use excuses like not "audible" ", if you think this is valid reason for you, then why you suddenly said about the rhythm choices??. First you told me about the sound. Now, you mention the rhythm choices. Like I said, I didn't hear any sound that it should be "triples".
00:35:153 (3) - spacing here is also really low for such a strong beat consider increasing it
00:35:153 (3,4,5,6) - The rhythm is extremely wrong here. It should be https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/FEr7GRgm . The drum on 00:35:569 - is extremely obvious. I need more people to clarify this for him because apparently the mapper didn't hear any beat on 00:35:569 -
Our in-game conversation: https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/UCFtMCHH
Not sure whether your mp3 is different or whatever reason, then I wanna ask what was your reason behind the triples here then 00:35:403 (4,5) - . Is it because of the drum?
Yes. I only hear the drum on 00:35:403 (4,5). I feel weird when you guys ask me to map triples on 00:35:569. lol
00:38:653 (6,1) - It's the first time you're not stacking these kind of rhythm. This make it looks a bit off, as the spacing is the same as the 1/2 before it, yet it has a 1/1 gap. I'd suggest stacking 00:38:986 (1) - 's head with the circle
00:39:653 (3,4,1) - Yeah, it's another section that just doesn't really look right to me. This really feels weird to play, CTRL+G'ing 4 would fix this definitely.
00:44:319 (2,3,4,1) - The way you emphasize this part is quite weird/wrong. The 00:43:986 (1,2,3) - should have the same small spacing like https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/KhQaASHt while 00:44:986 (4) - should be spaced (and NC) to emphasize on the loud drum like https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/xket2u3C
Not exactly fixed ish. 00:44:986 (4) - needs to be NC and significantly spaced to emphasize on the obvious loud drum. Pretty sure that's the reason behind spacing your 00:45:153 (1) - .
NC on 00:44:986 (4) is not 'suitable' since the vocal on 00:45:153 (1) is more prominent. It does make sense if I NC here 00:45:153 (1)
00:44:986 (4,1,2) - This is very strange to play. The spacing is not mapped according to the music (4)(1) plays off the symbol hitsound very drastically then right after into a snap on (2) which isn't as emphasized. Unlike 00:45:986 (4,5,6) - which I can see hear and understand
I don't feel strange or awkward to play on this part. You can see the same spacing on this pattern 00:43:986 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) so it won't make player confuse to play. 00:45:153 this sound is prominent compare to this 00:45:319 . That's why I add finish hs on 00:45:153 (1)
The problem here is that you're inducing a slow down with the very low spacing on 00:44:319 (2,3,4) - , yet 00:43:986 (1,2) - as the same sounds but has a much bigger spacing. I'd suggest spacing 00:43:986 (1,2) - in the same way as 00:44:319 (2,3,4) -
00:45:153 (5,1) - i think swapping NCs will help more with understanding change in the gaps, also NC on 00:45:153 (5) - will reflect finish hs better as well as make 00:44:986 (4,5,1) - 1/2 gaps more readable
00:46:653 (1,2) - You don't use this kind of flow at all plus this 00:46:319 (6,2) - overlap isn't structured. Even something as simple as https://puu.sh/CS21M/9edbd61393.png would be a rather noticeable improvement in my opinion
00:46:653 (1,2,3,4) - this one represent the tone of vocal. So i think i just move away the 00:46:986 (2) to prevent overlap and messy flow
00:55:986 (1,3,4,5) - The structure would look cleaner if you were to not use this kind of very noticeable "unstructured" overlaps
01:03:986 (1) - oddly positioned because the rest of the 1/4 sliders 01:04:319 (4,5,1,2,3) - are like spaced nicely right next to each slider, while 01:03:986 (1) - seems pretty isolated
01:05:319 (1,2) - inconsistent rhythm. Should be following similar rhythm like 00:54:653 (1,2,3) - or 00:57:319 (1,2,3) -
Don't call it "intentional" and resolved this issue without any explanation. What makes the vocal/music so special that it calls for different rhythm? The example parts that I've gave have the exactly similar way of how the song is sang with the exact same instrument in the background. What makes 01:05:319 (1,2) - rhythmically different than the others?
dude, i've seen a lot of maps that didn't follow the same rhythm. it still got ranked. Why you want to bother the rhythm choices i've made on this one??? And why it should be similar??????.
01:08:986 (4,1) - Surprised you used this rhythm over https://i.imgur.com/okp374U.png Main emphasis on 01:09:153 beats the downbeat imo as well as since you're mapping a lot to vocals
I don't emphasize the vocal a lot since I only main focus on the 1/2 rhythm where the BG sound are more prominent compare to vocal beat
01:10:653 (1) - weak emphasize on the strong vocal on 01:10:986 - . Try this rhythm: https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/CSyZmDTg
weak emphasize? I didn't want to make it more dense since I make like 01:42:653 (1,2,3,4,1)
01:24:486 (4,1,2,3) - pretty big jump that flow badly to the streams. Make your flow more downwards ish for better stream flow. Example: https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/9HiFccTR
The structure of this whole 01:23:986 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) is really fine. I dunno why you ask me to make the flow more downwards. The flow of this stream 01:24:653 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) is already downward enough tho
01:34:486 (4) - should make the 1/4 slider flow nicely towards the next slider. Example: https://scarlet.s-ul.eu/dAbYXxem
The direction of 1/4 slider is really important for controlling the flow of your map.
01:35:819 (1) - Inconsistent rhythm. Is either you extend your 00:53:153 (4) - slider or shorten the 01:35:819 (1) - slider.
is not about weird/unsnapped rhythm. Is more of the consistency behind the rhythm choices. What makes the 01:35:819 (1) - so special that it gets a 3/4 slider while 00:53:153 (4) - doesn't?
Nvm. I will treat it the same as yukizura's NC. Applied on other diffs
01:55:817 (3) - I would stack it with end of 01:53:370 (1) - to make this jump less huge when it's a down part, plus I think more spacing with 01:55:982 (4) - would fit more the song.
don't think this is necessary issue that need to point out because a lot of maps that doesn't have the same end time on each diffs