Thank you very much, HR ♥
forum
MitiS - 1.16.2016
posted
Total Posts
143
Placeholder, going to mod this today.
Topic Starter
Wafu wrote:
Placeholder, going to mod this today.
No need, Okoratu is on the job V:
so we changed like 2 patterns in eloquent
and hitsounding in voli's kiai because not completely muting sliderends sounds a l o t better
and hitsounding in voli's kiai because not completely muting sliderends sounds a l o t better
Topic Starter
Thanks dude, 16th Jan ranked date hype!Okoratu wrote:
so we changed like 2 patterns in eloquent
and hitsounding in voli's kiai because not completely muting sliderends sounds a l o t better
Oko, I will marry you. I swear to God.
Memes intensify :^)Hula wrote:
16th Jan ranked date hype!
Gratz :3~
i had a version of this map from 12/23/2015, eloquent was the only diff
if anyone wants? idk
puu.sh/mpnO4/dd24afab0f.rar
gj on the map hula
if anyone wants? idk
puu.sh/mpnO4/dd24afab0f.rar
gj on the map hula
Topic Starter
Fser wrote:
i had a version of this map from 12/23/2015, eloquent was the only diff
if anyone wants? idk
puu.sh/mpnO4/dd24afab0f.rar
gj on the map hula
Lol, if you didn't update the map, gimme the .osz, I want the old mp3 before MitiS updated it, since that old mp3 doesn't exist anywhere else now
.Are you kidding me guys? Placeholder doesn't mean I am the one who's going to bubble/qualify the map. I placed it here to make you guys aware that something is most likely going to be mentioned/tl;dr I was going to mod the map.Hula wrote:
No need, Okoratu is on the job V:
Wake up, you qualified a map 10 minutes after I said that I'll mod it, even though I posted the placeholder.
Edit: There's unrankable issue.
So, first of all quality of your mp3 is not 192kbps. It's converted from 128kbps to 192kbps. You may also notice the mp3 in current map has lower high-frequency cap than the 128kbps, clearly saying the mp3 is not even minimum of 128kbps, because it contains less data than the 128kbps version from soundcloud.
So 2 qualities are broken at once:
- mp3 bitrate is not in accordance with its quality, you just used higher bitrate, but that only increased file size and degraded quality
- mp3 doesn't satisfy the minimum of 128kbps requirement
The mp3 was sourced from MitiS own youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62UPamfk_cc and that this and soundcloud are the only sources of the mp3 on the net, nowhere to buy this song, so if it's 128 kbps, it's 128 kbps, but it's in fact 192 kbps, encoded from 256kbps from youtube using a ripper.
Plus, 128 kbps .mp3s aren't unrankable.
There is absolutely nothing unrankable with the set.
Plus, 128 kbps .mp3s aren't unrankable.
There is absolutely nothing unrankable with the set.
Youtube is not even 128kbps, nor this mp3. Soundcloud doesn't degrade the quality that much as youtube and converting it from youtube to 192kbps doesn't make sense as you only take mp3 below 128kbps (because youtube won't give you more) and convert it to 192kbps - That is decreasing the quality and increasing filesize with no data at all.Yuii- wrote:
The mp3 was sourced from MitiS own youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62UPamfk_cc and that this and soundcloud are the only sources of the mp3 on the net, nowhere to buy this song, so if it's 128 kbps, it's 128 kbps, but it's in fact 192 kbps, encoded from 256kbps from youtube using a ripper.
Plus, 128 kbps .mp3s aren't unrankable.
There is absolutely nothing unrankable with the set.
tl;dr mp3 is not 128kbps and its quality is not reasonable. You're trying to defend with things that I've proven are incorrect, so there's no point in telling me this.
"Plus, 128 kbps .mp3s aren't unrankable." - Yeah, it isn't, but it must really be at least 128kbps + the mp3's bitrate must be in accordance with its data, which it clearly isn't as I said in previous post.
uhm, actually there is no better version in existence yet, even if you try to download this song from his SC quality will be the same, guess you know how to use Spek :3 So you can't actually blame Hula for the mp3 quality
but of course there is no reason to uprate this to 192kbps while original is in 128kpbs (tho I don't think this is unrankable), and skipping mods is no-no
but of course there is no reason to uprate this to 192kbps while original is in 128kpbs (tho I don't think this is unrankable), and skipping mods is no-no
agreeSieg wrote:
skipping mods is no-no
Topic Starter
Okay. Sorry for late reply, banchobot is mean to me
About the MP3 for 1.16.2016. There are two locations where you can listen/buy/do anything with this song which was uploaded by the artist, that is youtube and his soundcloud, he originally released this on the 20th December which had less samples than it does now, he then sneakily added more samples and re-released it, posting it on his twitter feed. - https://twitter.com/MitisOfficial/statu ... 0587355136 on 30th December. I think the title alludes to his new release with Mahi, but that's just me speculating.
About the mp3 quality, I'm not trying to fool any ranking criteria and stop making it out like we are. If you rip from the youtube video from MitiS' official channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62UPamfk_cc using some HD ripper, it comes as 233 kbps, no idea why, but I ripped it as that, and then added 3 seconds on the front with audacity and reencoded to 192kbps. That reencoding obviously might cause some quality loss, but I'm always going to have to do that as I need to add 3 seconds on the front because the offset is basically 0, iirc is 0.
There is no source for a higher quality mp3, sorry if you're an audiophile, but I don't feel like this mp3 is significantly shitty, seems perfectly acceptable to me.
About the MP3 for 1.16.2016. There are two locations where you can listen/buy/do anything with this song which was uploaded by the artist, that is youtube and his soundcloud, he originally released this on the 20th December which had less samples than it does now, he then sneakily added more samples and re-released it, posting it on his twitter feed. - https://twitter.com/MitisOfficial/statu ... 0587355136 on 30th December. I think the title alludes to his new release with Mahi, but that's just me speculating.
About the mp3 quality, I'm not trying to fool any ranking criteria and stop making it out like we are. If you rip from the youtube video from MitiS' official channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62UPamfk_cc using some HD ripper, it comes as 233 kbps, no idea why, but I ripped it as that, and then added 3 seconds on the front with audacity and reencoded to 192kbps. That reencoding obviously might cause some quality loss, but I'm always going to have to do that as I need to add 3 seconds on the front because the offset is basically 0, iirc is 0.
There is no source for a higher quality mp3, sorry if you're an audiophile, but I don't feel like this mp3 is significantly shitty, seems perfectly acceptable to me.
Sieg wrote:
even if you try to download this song from his SC quality will be the same, guess you know how to use Spek :3 So you can't actually blame Hula for the mp3 quality
but of course there is no reason to uprate this to 192kbps while original is in 128kpbs (tho I don't think this is unrankable), and skipping mods is no-no
- 1. SC is higher quality. I exactly posted the picture for comparison. He didn't have to convert it at all because SC does have exactly 128kbps. Already explained SC (which could pretty much be just replaced without converting) vs his mp3 here: (SC) (His mp3)
Therefore there IS higher quality available and anyone claiming it is 100% wrong. - 2. RC even says "Try and source mp3 files yourself; ripping them from a streaming video site often results in low quality audio with high file sizes." - That's making it inappropriate and "The song's audio file must be of reasonable quality" makes it unrankable, because it is not reasonable. Why high file size + worse quality? That's not reasonable
Topic Starter
Wafu, you're not listening.
There's youtube or SC, there's no itunes, no amazon, no spotify, no bandcamp, there's no other place you can get this mp3. I have to rip it from either SC or youtube.
I HAVE to reencode it and place silence at the start cos the offset is something like -2 on both rips because they're uploaded both by the same guy, probably exactly same file, i don't even know. So reencoding will probably cause some quality loss.
SC is higher quality on the graph, but seemingly marginal, and listening to them with my headphones, I can't hear any difference. I didn't upscale from 128 ever, I know that's pointless, can't make something out of nothing.
Youtube has higher quality audio than SC, and I ripped from SC.
There's youtube or SC, there's no itunes, no amazon, no spotify, no bandcamp, there's no other place you can get this mp3. I have to rip it from either SC or youtube.
I HAVE to reencode it and place silence at the start cos the offset is something like -2 on both rips because they're uploaded both by the same guy, probably exactly same file, i don't even know. So reencoding will probably cause some quality loss.
SC is higher quality on the graph, but seemingly marginal, and listening to them with my headphones, I can't hear any difference. I didn't upscale from 128 ever, I know that's pointless, can't make something out of nothing.
Youtube has higher quality audio than SC, and I ripped from SC.
Audio quality difference is not more than 3-5% which is negligible for this bitrate anyways (you won't be able to recognize it blindly). That's why I state again that quality all the same.
I think the main argument here is that this is 128 kbs quality encoded to 192 kbs
Which i didnt notice since reading spectrographs to find out if the mp3 is wasting filesize is not sth i can do efficiently because nobody used to care as long as the mp3 isnt noticably broken.
How big is the difference between the 128 and 192 kbs version here anyways i dont want to sound rude but as far as i can see no filesize limitations were broken here.
Which i didnt notice since reading spectrographs to find out if the mp3 is wasting filesize is not sth i can do efficiently because nobody used to care as long as the mp3 isnt noticably broken.
How big is the difference between the 128 and 192 kbs version here anyways i dont want to sound rude but as far as i can see no filesize limitations were broken here.
No re-encoding is needed because SC does have the pause you are requiring and first downbeat is not cut there at all.Hula wrote:
I HAVE to reencode it and place silence at the start cos the offset is something like -2 on both rips because they're uploaded both by the same guy, probably exactly same file, i don't even know. So reencoding will probably cause some quality loss.
@Sieg: Well, people will probably not hear difference between 96kbps and 128kbps, but that doesn't mean we can use it. The main problem is the reason for encoding <128kbps to 192kbps to just degrade it even more and increase filesize. That's making it not reasonable quality. Reasonable = Makes sense = Makes sense with used bitrate.
@Okoratu: It broke "mp3 quality is not reasonable as I described above". And if you don't want to be rude why'd you qualify completely not caring that I was going to mod it. Difference by filesize is 1MB (SC does have 2MB) - Therefore 1/2 of original file as additional file size. Not really reasonable.
Well, I'm getting to OT already, not going to post here anymore unless related discussion. Others avoid it too, talk only about two issues I mentioned. That it is harder to notice doesn't make it passing rules.
I want to say the notes' volume from 00:33:107 - till 01:33:107 - seems inaudible. The music is way louder than the notes so you'll see it's way easier to play the map if you set values between 20 and 23 in the timing sections. This applies to the whole set.
Voli's Medium
EDIT: However, I like the mapset and the combo colours! :3 They are great! o3o
Voli's Medium
- 01:44:357 (1) - Genitalia sliders are unrankable and you've used a vagina-shaped slider. Simply I recommend some regular oval/ractangle/round shape instead of this one.
- You are capable of blankets which is shown here: 00:19:044 (2,3) - So why haven't you used them at the moments below so the mapset is Polished and nice and smooth and designed properly? D:
- 00:26:544 (2,3) -
- 00:41:544 (2,3) -
- 00:56:544 (2,3) -
- 01:11:544 (2,3) -
- 01:26:544 (2,3) -
- 00:11:544 (2) - Also, let me tell you it has a broken flow that doesn't work if you ask me. The moment doesn't call for any flow-breaking moment so I will introduce you to something playable: *CLICK*
EDIT: However, I like the mapset and the combo colours! :3 They are great! o3o
Topic Starter
Voli's slider is 5/7Krfawy wrote:
I want to say the notes' volume from 00:33:107 - till 01:33:107 - seems inaudible. The music is way louder than the notes so you'll see it's way easier to play the map if you set values between 20 and 23 in the timing sections. This applies to the whole set. These volumes are perfectly audible to me, make sure you got 100/100 on your volume thingies, also you're more than welcome to use lower music volume. I didn't find the volumes an issue
Also how about we stop having an argue about 128kbs because it seems kinda off and stupid to me like it doesn't really change anything. :C Agreed, seems like this mapset is being picked on cos it's like one of 2 or 3 sets to be qualified today
About yuii's blankets, I don't think they were intended to ever be blanketed. they're not exactly fail blankets, they're pretty far off from it.
1) You are comparing 00:19:044 (2,3) - 1/2 slider + 1/1 slider with pure 1/2+1/2 sliders. At this level of SV speed it's almost impossible to create such perfect blankets. Please, understand that.
2) The second point you brought up to the discussion has a terrible transition with 00:14:357 (1) - . And I want a circular transition, that's intentional as well.
2) The second point you brought up to the discussion has a terrible transition with 00:14:357 (1) - . And I want a circular transition, that's intentional as well.
I used 100% of the volume in-game, however, I am not going to use full volume for my speakers and headphones because the music will make my head explode so I think there's something wrong Hula.
Because probably there's pink on those circles. XDDDKrfawy wrote:
EDIT: However, I like the mapset and the combo colours! :3 They are great! o3o
Topic Starter
You have to use headphones, softwhistles are never gonna be that audible with speakers. I map and play with 100/100, soooo, ye.Krfawy wrote:
I used 100% of the volume in-game, however, I am not going to use full volume for my speakers and headphones because the music will make my head explode so I think there's something wrong Hula.
As someone using 100/100 and headphones i had no trouble hearing hitsounds krfawy zzz
Posting placeholders is very different from actual mods, i dont really care if someone plans to mod something if i dont deem it necessary
Posting placeholders is very different from actual mods, i dont really care if someone plans to mod something if i dont deem it necessary
It's none different. You qualified it with 'idc' attitude 10 minutes after I said anything. If you have urge to qualify map while one's modding it and he said he's modding it, you probably should reconsider quality > quantity idea. You're just denying map's potential improvement even before qualification.Okoratu wrote:
Posting placeholders is very different from actual mods, i dont really care if someone plans to mod something if i dont deem it necessary
Edit: This mp3 does have much better filesize/quality ratio (mathematically it's ~40% loss) and it doesn't require cutting nor negative offset + it's real 128kbps, it's nothing converted to higher bitrate, therefore it stays same as the highest available quality.
Edit2: 24 hours are not THAT long to wait. In real, it was about ~9 hours to midnight in our timezone, don't tell me it's that long time. Waiting doesn't hurt map at all. Be a bit moderate and don't limit people by time, at least not by 10 minutes, without even asking them. I'm sorry, but this was pretty ignorant.
@deetz he had ability to ask me, PMs are free.
posting a placeholder is like saying "i want to say something about this map sometime today"
there's no guarantee you will do it, ever. I've seen people post placeholders and not doing anything, ever, a lot. Hence i don't care if someone placeholders anything.
there's no guarantee you will do it, ever. I've seen people post placeholders and not doing anything, ever, a lot. Hence i don't care if someone placeholders anything.
placeholder!!!
I have to agree with Krfawy here.
Also, about hitsound volume, theyre indeed really low. I wouldn't say the whole section needs an increase in hitsound volume but some parts could use a volume increase because they aren't immediately noticeable for me
. Basically I shouldn't have to open your map up in editor and go over any section in order to hear the hitsound. They should be clearly audible from game.
00:10:607 -
00:18:107 -
01:18:107 - Were the ones i noted anyways.
Also, what's with the difficulty settings on Voli's Medium. CS size plays an important role in determining how difficult a map will be. A change from CS 3 to CS 5 may not be much for experienced players, but it's a huge jump for the playerbase that this set is aimed at. CS is a design choice, and people usually decide on that right when they map, but this is a poor choice imo, sry Voli.
I have to agree with Krfawy here.
About the blankets
00:26:544 (2,3) - Without using AR/just eyeballing. Takes like 5 seconds.
Also, about hitsound volume, theyre indeed really low. I wouldn't say the whole section needs an increase in hitsound volume but some parts could use a volume increase because they aren't immediately noticeable for me
. Basically I shouldn't have to open your map up in editor and go over any section in order to hear the hitsound. They should be clearly audible from game.00:10:607 -
00:18:107 -
01:18:107 - Were the ones i noted anyways.
Also, what's with the difficulty settings on Voli's Medium. CS size plays an important role in determining how difficult a map will be. A change from CS 3 to CS 5 may not be much for experienced players, but it's a huge jump for the playerbase that this set is aimed at. CS is a design choice, and people usually decide on that right when they map, but this is a poor choice imo, sry Voli
.who says that they will absolutely look better as blankets? that's your opinion, they don't even seem to have been intended to be blankets 
also I play on 50% master volume w/ 18% volume in windows and all of the hitsounds sound perfectly clear to me, even suiting the calm atmosphere of the song. just throwing my thoughts out there.
also I play on 50% master volume w/ 18% volume in windows and all of the hitsounds sound perfectly clear to me, even suiting the calm atmosphere of the song. just throwing my thoughts out there.
From an outsider to standard mapping, that looks pretty irrelevant.Monstrata wrote:
00:26:544 (2,3) - Without using AR/just eyeballing. Takes like 5 seconds.
Topic Starter
Wafu, I didn't want/need anymore mods, this has been modded by many people now, especially consider it's a ENN set. So I'm not gonna wait on a placeholder which was posted whilst Okoratu was half way through modding for the rank, why would I do that? I had been spamming this set on modhelp and modreqs since I submitted it over 2 weeks ago every day, that's how i got BNs and mods 
. I'm not obliged to wait for every person in osu to mod my map.
The CS thing is probably very nice for less skilled players to be able to enjoy aiming whilst also achieving, Voli had a few guys who were like ~400k in rank and they didn't struggle with the size, so it's a good map for them to enjoy, it's interesting, i like it cos it's interesting.
The volumes are more than fine, I was annoyed that the volume % was so low whilst I was mapping, but I don't want them overwhelming the music, I like my hitsounds, so they got some attention.
. I'm not obliged to wait for every person in osu to mod my map.The CS thing is probably very nice for less skilled players to be able to enjoy aiming whilst also achieving, Voli had a few guys who were like ~400k in rank and they didn't struggle with the size, so it's a good map for them to enjoy, it's interesting, i like it cos it's interesting.
The volumes are more than fine, I was annoyed that the volume % was so low whilst I was mapping, but I don't want them overwhelming the music, I like my hitsounds, so they got some attention.
I was referring to
with my comment about blankets. Nothing to do with blankets being higher quality than not blanketting xD. Just showing its very possible to create blankets and very easy to accomplish anyways.Yuii- wrote:
1) At this level of SV speed it's almost impossible to create such perfect blankets. Please, understand that.
The difference is literally nule, what okay.
Just popping in to say the CS isn't a problem in my diff - it is designed with the CS in mind, fits well with the minimalistic nature of the song, and both the incredibly low bpm and the way I mapped the difficulty should warrant more than enough time for beginners to have a steady aim. I checked the replays and seems like people 400~500k are already passing it with DT. Also the pass rate of my difficulty is 38% right now, nicely in between the 60% on easy and the 15% on the hardest diff. I'm not saying these are absolute or 100% accurate statistics, but they do give us information about the spread.
It's not like you don't want or need mods. If you get 12SP, it doesn't make further modding any worse or any useless. You are just spitting into modder's face. If you don't want anyone else to touch your map, don't take it on qualification or learn to accept the fact that anyone is eligible to mod. Even if you got 100 mods before Okoratu's qualification, you'd be obligate to answer them. It's not about speed or how many mods come. If you didn't want to be 'unfair' to Oko, because he was already modding it, how could you be 'unfair' to me completely denying me to say a word?Hula wrote:
Wafu, I didn't want/need anymore mods, this has been modded by many people now, especially consider it's a ENN set. So I'm not gonna wait on a placeholder which was posted whilst Okoratu was half way through modding for the rank, why would I do that? I had been spamming this set on modhelp and modreqs since I submitted it over 2 weeks ago every day, that's how i got BNs and mods
Actually, no. CS have nothing to do with difficulty alone. Its more about [SV / HitObjectRadius] (or something close to that, I'm not so sure atm). THAT is what determinates how hard a map will be.Monstrata wrote:
Also, what's with the difficulty settings on Voli's Medium. CS size plays an important role in determining how difficult a map will be. A change from CS 3 to CS 5 may not be much for experienced players, but it's a huge jump for the playerbase that this set is aimed at. CS is a design choice, and people usually decide on that right when they map, but this is a poor choice imo, sry Voli
Faster SV, harder map will be considering CS is same. Higher CS, harder map will be considering SV is same.
Lets check some random recently ranked map.
Looks fine doesn't it? CS3 -> CS3.5. (40,98 -> 38,74)
Now lets check SV.
0.6 -> 1.1. Wow. Thats quite huge increasement, isn't it? Almost as twice as fast.
Lets use our formula now:
60 / 40,98 = 1,46~ for Easy
110 / 38,74 = 2,84~ for Normal
Normal is roughly about 95% harder than Easy.
Lets check this set:
CS3 -> CS5 (40,98 -> 32,01)
SV 1,3 -> 1,5
Lets use the formula again for this set:
130 / 40,98 = 3,17~ for Easy
150 / 32,01 = 4,69~ for Normal.
Normal is only about 48% harder than Easy.
I don't see any issue, really.
Dirai, the map you referred isn't "recent". It was ranked 5 months ago.