Monstrata wrote:

I just came here to say that "Terror Oni" sounds like a type of pasta.

bbj0920 wrote:

Monstrata wrote:

I just came here to say that "Terror Oni" sounds like a type of pasta.

terroroni mazzeroni

1. Being "a sub-genre of rock", it's not a complete guarantee whatsoever that this is timed perfectly... BUT 270 SO NO CHOICE BUT OD 7
2. Debating whether or not HP should be higher. Consider that GC has HP3, but reaches 320 bpm, and doesn't let you recover HP. 3.5 would be fair despite the length and the deathstream.
3. The few 40% sections sound kind of on par with the instruments making it hard to focus on hitsounds alone. 50 might work better.
   
   
4. 01:31:256 (42) - d? Or some other don-heavy triplet, since having two kkd here makes it seem like there's some sort of rhythm or percussion I'm not hearing, compared to 01:33:569 (66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76) - where it's clear what you're mapping to.
5. 01:54:381 (127) - deleting this flows nicer, since it's technically three kdd leading into the kkkkdddd.
6. 02:01:069 (202,203,204,205,206,207,208,209) - I think this should be a 5plet like how you mapped it before for consistency's sake?
7. 02:06:819 (267,268,269,270,271,272,273,274,275,276,277,278,279,280,281,282,283,284,285) - idk how you choose how you map something sometimes. This part is mapped like there's a lot of depth to it, but the only part that's mapped close to the song is 02:07:819 (277,278,279,280,281,282,283,284,285) - where the guitar does stuff.
   02:07:069 (269,270,271,272) - kkd k, then move 02:07:631 (275) - to 02:07:506 to match the guitar I mentioned above, then (this is one big thing) move 02:08:881 (290) - to 02:09:131, and delete 02:09:506 (297) - so it's a 1/4, two 1/2, 1/4, sort of pattern. IDK WHY I BULLIED THIS ONE PART.
8. 02:15:631 (370) - Similarly, if you did something else here, the kdd kdd kdd kkd would seem to follow guitar more.
9. 02:19:631 (416) - ^ to 02:19:381 and made into k?
10. 03:17:819 (154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161) - I think this can represent the chugchugchugchug much better. Cutting 03:17:725 (153) - off and then making something like, kdkdkkkkd starting at 03:17:819 would be nicer.
11. 03:21:569 (188,189,190,191,192,193,194,195,196,197,198,199,200,201) - This entire part seems mapped wrong (i.e. 03:22:506 (197,198) - should be dons basically). Maybe d kdd k ddddkkd for that part?
12. 03:57:279 (5) - If you're not going to follow the rhythm fully you may as well stop at the 1/2 since 5 1/6 is awful. (Also note that you never do it again)
13. 04:28:166- This is so gross aaah. It follows the guitar so poorly due to how you're trying to go for the snare hits as well. Something more structured would be nice. Literally anything. dddkdddkdkdkddkk or dkdkdkdkdkdkddkk ANYTHING.
    AND 04:31:046 (192) - k TO EMPHASIZE THAT PLEASE.
14. 04:36:806- This part could use more triplet variation like every other one has.
15. 05:07:166 (106,107,108,109) - THIS IS THE SNARE SHAKING CALM TF DOWN NO 1/6. ddkkk would even work nicely.
16. 06:33:379 (201,202,203,204,205,206,207) - ddddkddd? idk why you cut ANY of these short, actually. It plays better for the dddddddd to lead into something else.
17. 06:27:272 - ^
18. 06:28:987 - ^ etc. Makes no real sense unless you're using big notes. Actually, you could really use big notes, as the 'k' is pretty underwhelming.
19. 06:39:454 (251) - Deleting this makes stuff way less confusing.
20. 07:00:807 (34,35,36,37) - Stream (kkddddkdd)? It's a nice spot to lead into a finisher and make it impact more.
21. 07:33:584 (12) - Hey! We're back to old suggestions. Maybe move this somewhere?
22. 07:41:584 (108) - ^
23. 07:45:584 (153) - ^ this part has so much kdd ddk etc
24. 07:58:897 (29) - Delete? Why is this the only string of notes this long? There are stops in it as well like this one.
25. 08:07:834 - Add k? Density seems to vary throughout this part but I think having it denser at the end of a stanza is what feels best in most cases.
26. 08:10:272 (142,143,144,145) - ^ kdddk?

OzzyOzrock wrote:

FURRY STORM SO THEY DON'T THINK I RIPPED OFF kkddkdddkkddkddd.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[Terroroni]

1. Being "a sub-genre of rock", it's not a complete guarantee whatsoever that this is timed perfectly... BUT 270 SO NO CHOICE BUT OD 7
2. Debating whether or not HP should be higher. Consider that GC has HP3, but reaches 320 bpm, and doesn't let you recover HP. 3.5 would be fair despite the length and the deathstream.
3. The few 40% sections sound kind of on par with the instruments making it hard to focus on hitsounds alone. 50 might work better.
   
   
4. 01:31:256 (42) - d? Or some other don-heavy triplet, since having two kkd here makes it seem like there's some sort of rhythm or percussion I'm not hearing, compared to 01:33:569 (66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,75,76) - where it's clear what you're mapping to. the two kkd work just fine they represent the same sound as it is on the song
5. 01:54:381 (127) - deleting this flows nicer, since it's technically three kdd leading into the kkkkdddd. oooo
6. 02:01:069 (202,203,204,205,206,207,208,209) - I think this should be a 5plet like how you mapped it before for consistency's sake? filled the gap instead, i think it hints the guitar wub more
7. 02:06:819 (267,268,269,270,271,272,273,274,275,276,277,278,279,280,281,282,283,284,285) - idk how you choose how you map something sometimes. This part is mapped like there's a lot of depth to it, but the only part that's mapped close to the song is 02:07:819 (277,278,279,280,281,282,283,284,285) - where the guitar does stuff. what are you talking about in the chorus i use kdd kdd kdd kdd because it entirely fits the depth of the voice plus the emphasizing of the heavy bass drums
   02:07:069 (269,270,271,272) - kkd k, then move 02:07:631 (275) - to 02:07:506 to match the guitar I mentioned above, then (this is one big thing) move 02:08:881 (290) - to 02:09:131, and delete 02:09:506 (297) - so it's a 1/4, two 1/2, 1/4, sort of pattern. IDK WHY I BULLIED THIS ONE PART. not following guitar at all
8. 02:15:631 (370) - Similarly, if you did something else here, the kdd kdd kdd kkd would seem to follow guitar more.
9. 02:19:631 (416) - ^ to 02:19:381 and made into k? not following guitarrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
10. 03:17:819 (154,155,156,157,158,159,160,161) - I think this can represent the chugchugchugchug much better. Cutting 03:17:725 (153) - off and then making something like, kdkdkkkkd starting at 03:17:819 would be nicer. did kdkdddkdk not gonna lose emphasis on the last snare
11. 03:21:569 (188,189,190,191,192,193,194,195,196,197,198,199,200,201) - This entire part seems mapped wrong (i.e. 03:22:506 (197,198) - should be dons basically). Maybe d kdd k ddddkkd for that part? did something
12. 03:57:279 (5) - If you're not going to follow the rhythm fully you may as well stop at the 1/2 since 5 1/6 is awful. (Also note that you never do it again) plays perfectly fine as 180 bpm kkkkk 1/4 plus the fact of it being ISOLATED FROM EVERYTHING
13. 04:28:166- This is so gross aaah. It follows the guitar so poorly due to how you're trying to go for the snare hits as well. Something more structured would be nice. Literally anything. dddkdddkdkdkddkk or dkdkdkdkdkdkddkk ANYTHING. implying i wanted to follow guitar?????? im not ozzy duhh
    AND 04:31:046 (192) - k TO EMPHASIZE THAT PLEASE. ooo
14. 04:36:806- This part could use more triplet variation like every other one has. sure
15. 05:07:166 (106,107,108,109) - THIS IS THE SNARE SHAKING CALM TF DOWN NO 1/6. ddkkk would even work nicely. that 1/6 works just fine for me, its not hard to hit and i like how it kinda finishes off all the stanzas on the 250 bpm part
16. 06:33:379 (201,202,203,204,205,206,207) - ddddkddd? idk why you cut ANY of these short, actually. It plays better for the dddddddd to lead into something else.
17. 06:27:272 - ^
18. 06:28:987 - ^ etc. Makes no real sense unless you're using big notes. Actually, you could really use big notes, as the 'k' is pretty underwhelming.
19. 06:39:454 (251) - Deleting this makes stuff way less confusing. fixed the 3 above
20. 07:00:807 (34,35,36,37) - Stream (kkddddkdd)? It's a nice spot to lead into a finisher and make it impact more. sure
21. 07:33:584 (12) - Hey! We're back to old suggestions. Maybe move this somewhere? Hey! We're back to old answers.
22. 07:41:584 (108) - ^
23. 07:45:584 (153) - ^ this part has so much kdd ddk etc ssssss
24. 07:58:897 (29) - Delete? Why is this the only string of notes this long? There are stops in it as well like this one. sure
25. 08:07:834 - Add k? Density seems to vary throughout this part but I think having it denser at the end of a stanza is what feels best in most cases.
26. 08:10:272 (142,143,144,145) - ^ kdddk? sure dad

peace out girl scout

1. 02:38:569 - 02:58:576 -, Hide unnecessary barlines. This part doesn't have any notes, so not affect for playing. However looks really not beautiful, bar lines should be on each first beat.
2. 03:23:069 - Hide barline?
   
   
3. 04:57:686 - Add redline here. Because 04:56:006 - This measure is 7/4.
4. 06:22:237 - Hitsound isn't too small?
5. 06:22:237 - 280bpm. drums sounds like 1/3.
6. 06:39:379 - Barline should be here.
7. 07:08:521 - Add redline here what checked "omit first bar line" for hiding unnecessary barline.

1. 01:36:444 (98) - Normal notes works good enough imo. no strong sound here
2. 03:01:881 (17) - remove finisher? ^
3. 03:10:694 (100,101,102,103) - why not finisher? i think it works better than 1/6. similar way as 03:19:319 (166) -
   
   
4. 03:05:444 (49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62) - I felt position of 1/1 is weird. no reason that not follow drums rhythm. (add note at 03:06:662 - and delete 03:06:287 (58,60) - 03:05:537 (50,52) - )
5. 03:42:190 (39,40,41,42,43) - lol. isn't it delay? could be on 1/12 tick right.
6. 05:07:166 (106,107,108,109,110,111) - Remove 1/6s and add kat 05:07:466 ? it fits to drums well imo
7. 05:15:446 How about adding spinner here?
   
   
8. 08:14:022 - 08:18:147 - Isn't This part too monotone? Other colors also fits to sound well..

tasuke912 wrote:

Hi.
[ General]

1. 02:38:569 - 02:58:576 -, Hide unnecessary barlines. This part doesn't have any notes, so not affect for playing. However looks really not beautiful, bar lines should be on each first beat.
2. 03:23:069 - Hide barline?
   
   
3. 04:57:686 - Add redline here. Because 04:56:006 - This measure is 7/4.
4. 06:22:237 - Hitsound isn't too small?
5. 06:22:237 - 280bpm. drums sounds like 1/3. hmmm I think it really is 140 with the 1/8 at the ending
6. 06:39:379 - Barline should be here.
7. 07:08:521 - Add redline here what checked "omit first bar line" for hiding unnecessary barline.
   
   Fixed most of ^ except comment

[ Terror Oni]

1. 01:36:444 (98) - Normal notes works good enough imo. no strong sound here But there is a strong cymbal crash on the background ><
2. 03:01:881 (17) - remove finisher? ^ The finisher is more to represent the high tone instrument that plays there (idk how it's called probably the bass)
3. 03:10:694 (100,101,102,103) - why not finisher? i think it works better than 1/6. similar way as 03:19:319 (166) - Oh yes
   
   
4. 03:05:444 (49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62) - I felt position of 1/1 is weird. no reason that not follow drums rhythm. (add note at 03:06:662 - and delete 03:06:287 (58,60) - 03:05:537 (50,52) - ) Oh done!
5. 03:42:190 (39,40,41,42,43) - lol. isn't it delay? could be on 1/12 tick right. Fixed
6. 05:07:166 (106,107,108,109,110,111) - Remove 1/6s and add kat 05:07:466 ? it fits to drums well imo I think the short 1/6 works pretty well at ending the stanza because it gives a blasting feeling before the SV down ><
7. 05:15:446 How about adding spinner here? There isn't much time I think, and the music doesn't go crazy to ensure a keyboard mashing element ><
   
   
8. 08:14:022 - 08:18:147 - Isn't This part too monotone? Other colors also fits to sound well.. I planned on increasing SV of this, but it would be overkill XD also I think the monotone ending fits more than anything else ;w;

call me back (¦3[▓▓]

Prophecy wrote:

speedrank again;w;

1. 02:38:569 - 02:58:514 - please fix bar lines positions
   
   
2. 04:55:766 (8) - (7/4)
3. 04:57:686 (18) - 4/4
4. 04:58:646 (26) - 6/4
5. 04:59:606 (34) - 4/4
6. 05:01:766 (51) - 4/4
7. 05:03:686 (74) - (7/4)
8. 05:05:366 (90) - 4/4
   
   
9. 07:08:521 - I didn't mean check it to existing red line. uncheck it and add red line here.
   

Aldwych wrote:

Hola Raiden!

Even if you would refuse it, i'll do my own check anyway :V
As i said i find the map generally ok, but i think we can still find something to change/improve. Even if it's pointless

[Terror Ono]

01:00:194 : Due to the "piano" sound (i guess), i would go for k instead, yet i can understand for some contrast but there's no beats to make it d. (Same thing for 01:08:194) apart from the contrast there is a beat... a bass drum hit. My mapping style is based on percussion mostly with really few exceptions (like guitar solos where I improvise a bit more)
01:03:069 : I'm a bit confuse around here about what you want to do. If we look around, you stack 1/2 most of the time once or twice. You did one time 3 but 4 1/2 in a row is a bit too much. Somehow i can understand if you would put a K here because there's a finisher background sound, but because you didn't that's strange imo. finishers only fit at the beginning of stanzas the way i mapped it, besides after the beginning of each stanza there are a handful of notes (be it 3 or 4) and i don't see it as a problem. The melody also sounds different in the 2nd stanza than on the first so I deemed the 1/4 unnecessary
01:16:069 : Did you miss a finisher? Compared to 01:14:569 for example. the snare hit is not as strong as the ones with finishers
03:52:446 : If we compare, this is simillar to 03:57:446 or at least this is maped on the same intention but not on the same way, one got a break + finisher one doesn't both. Maybe uniformize it? There's a similar streams after also. it's different, after the isolated kkkkk (which I intentionally isolated) there is a BPM change which would be shitty to play and to look at if I filled it up, so it's intentional
04:28:166 : Imo, the speed is a bit too much i would reduce a bit, (or find a middle), then max speed at 04:36:806, that makes more sense. the music goes rather nuts at this point already, so it'd be pointless to put less speed at it. Besides the 1/4 patterns like 04:35:366 - would be unreadable due to the scrolling speed
05:57:206 : "That is the coolest Speedup! I gotta get one of those Speedup! That is beautifull i love that!" :V lol ty i also think it's kinda cool

Well not much too say i'm not that pro to play, neither mod it efficiently. Just some stuff that i found.
GL hf vs haters ;p

tasuke912 wrote:

Barlines positions have improved. I think fine.

Bubbled! #1

1. 02:52:569 - This timing section should be removed. To be honest, this whole section is incorrectly timed. I am 100% sure the metronome doesn't change erratically like this, but it's not mapped so w/e.
   Because of this, I would propose a more correct change.
   1. 02:38:569 - Set a 240 BPM timing section here and make it 3/4. The music gives off a waltzy feeling so leaving it 3/4 all the way to 02:55:069 - is fine. Just because there is a tone at a given time, it doesn't mean a downbeat should be there. This would simplify a lot of things, and with 3/4 heavier notes actually do come on the downbeats (can't really be coincidence).
   2. 02:55:069 - Leaving it as 4/4 as it's noticeably different here and 4/4 fits. Others between can get removed.
      Apart from the first red line I am suggesting, all these are kinda optional since it's not mapped, but it would be nice to change.
2. 03:23:069 - This note is way too early. Try moving the red line to 03:23:087 and making it 120 bpm. There is no indication of a different BPM for this section, despite the offset shift. (EDIT: Don't forget to include another red line at 03:23:069 - for "omit the first barline" thingy. Actually you found this so THANKS. ╭( ･ㅂ･)و )
3. 03:23:440 - This would need +6 offset. You made such a change here - 03:57:446, and that change is good. Basically, you just need to bring it in line.
4. 03:47:440 - Same here, +6 to bring it in line.
5. 04:58:646 - This one is wrong. If you listen carefully, a downbeat could be found at 04:59:606. The evidence is at 04:54:086. This piece of music repeats throughout this section a lot, and is always 2 bars of 4/4, and then a switch.
   
   To make this easier and more simple, just change it to the following (ignore if you already have), I will explain at the end why.
   
   1. 04:56:006 - 3/4
   2. 04:56:726 - 4/4
   3. 04:59:606 - 3/4
   4. 05:01:766 - 4/4
   5. 05:03:686 - 3/4
   6. 05:04:406 - 4/4
   7. 05:07:286 - 3/4
   The reason for this is just pure logic:
   04:54:086 - 2 bars of 4/4 and then a change at 04:56:006. However, I would also notice that 04:56:726 - is the next heavy beat. Because of this, while the way of using 7/4 wouldn't be much too incorrect, but 3/4 + 4/4 would be correct regardless, and because of this, you can justify the 3/4 later.
   04:59:606 - This is the part where I really need to explain why this should be 3/4. First of all, if you follow the logic I explained above, then this would work, but 05:00:086 - sounds really heavy. That doesn't mean it has to be a downbeat though, it's just syncopated. Leaving this whole section in 3/4 and listening to the more subtle sounds would actually support this 3/4 (quiet drum rolls at 05:00:326 - and 05:01:046, and 2 additional strong syncopated drum hits on 05:00:806 - and 05:01:526 - .)
   And this just repeats.
   At the very end, it's slightly different, but the music "cuts off" compared to this so I think it fits too.

• 06:09:792 - 6/4

1. 06:11:125 - 4/4
2. 06:12:903 - 6/4
3. 06:14:236 - 4/4
4. 06:16:014 - 6/4
5. 06:17:347 - 4/4
6. 06:19:124 - 6/4
7. 06:20:457 - 4/4
8. 06:22:237 - and you need to fix the note, it escaped the green line which brings it to a stream end.
   
   If you listen to the melody, it has a distinct pattern which begins at 06:09:792 and repeats. This time, it's a 6/4 section then two 4/4 sections and this cycle repeats.
   
9. 07:08:521 - Add +8 offset here, it's a little early.

1. 02:38:569 - I still think this section is 4/4, the echoes sound like Half-note in this song, isn't it? If using 3/4, barelines looks really out of place especially 2nd and 4th. I can't agree without official data tbh
   
   Following tab isn't official, but it still keeps 4/4 rhythm.
   
   SPOILER

   
   
   
2. 03:23:821 (2,3) - I thought it should keep 1/1 rhythm in the similar way as 03:26:946 (6,7) -. 3/4+6/4+3/4 rhythm doesn't fit to the sound well and it seems like rhythm breaker.

tasuke912 wrote:

Few things

1. 02:38:569 - I still think this section is 4/4, the echoes sound like Half-note in this song, isn't it? If using 3/4, barelines looks really out of place especially 2nd and 4th. I can't agree without official data tbh Bringing perfect timing to that section is borderline impossible, and we shouldn't care too much because it isn't even mapped. I agree with lolcubes here, the song gives out a waltz-y feeling so I preferred to keep it 3/4, the echoes are just reverberations of the instrument but the main downbeats come down in 3/4 signature, it can't be a coincidence ;w; fixed
   
   Following tab isn't official, but it still keeps 4/4 rhythm.
   
   SPOILER

   
   
   
2. 03:23:821 (2,3) - I thought it should keep 1/1 rhythm in the similar way as 03:26:946 (6,7) -. 3/4+6/4+3/4 rhythm doesn't fit to the sound well and it seems like rhythm breaker. fixed