hi hi from my queue two weeks ago; you were sort of late but because the time frame was so close between the posts I decided to mod yours anyways~
hloy that saxophone is pure bliss-
[Transient]
hloy that saxophone is pure bliss-
[Transient]
- 01:48:274 (1,2) – I think it’d make more sense to have the (1) farther away from the (4) because it’s a part of a different phrase; right now it’s clumped up together with the previous phase and feels as though the emphasis here could be greater, which could be done by giving it more distance away from the previous combo. Similar situation occurs with 01:50:897 (1,2) – and 01:53:520 (1,2) –
- 02:50:570 (1) – I don’t think this NC is really necessary
- 04:16:471 (1,2,1,2) – I know this part can be mapped to the streamy bit here, but I think the map will have more impact if you wait for the stream to start at 04:17:783 (1) – instead. The buildup is more intense at 04:17:783 – in comparison to 04:16:471 -, so maybe it’s just me, but it feels like the stream starts too early. It’s kind of like you’re hyping up the buildup too early and it ruins the overall effect of that buildup. TL;DR: you're overdoing it here. use simpler rhythms for 04:16:471 (1,2,1,2) – because it ruins the buildup a little bit; it makes the buildup feel like it’s starting too early. For reference, look at 01:19:422 (1) – it’s very similar in composition, but the buildup here works more effectively because the streams don't start as early
- 05:04:996 (1,2) – this looks like it can be a potential blanket; move the (2) to the left a bit
- 00:38:111 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,1,2,3,4) – similar thing that I mentioned in Transient applies here as well; the stream here feels a little overdone in comparison to the music here because the buildup isn’t as intense as what you have mapped imo
- 00:39:750 (1) – uhh I think using two 1/4 sliders like you did in Transient works more effectively than the 1/2 slider here. also, take off the NC here and start it at 00:40:078 (2) – instead; there’s more emphasis on the downbeat
- 01:48:274 (1,2) – yeah this part that I mentioned in Transient can apply here as well. Same with 01:50:897 (1,2) -, and 01:53:520 (1,2) –
- 03:14:176 (4,5) – the flow here is kind of weird; it feels a little inconsistent with some of the other similar patterns. maybe Ctrl + G the (5)?
- 04:16:471 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3) – mentioned this in Transient as well, so what I suggested there applies here as well. Recap: feels kind of overdone because the buildup doesn’t start until 04:17:783 (1) –
- 04:48:602 (4,5) – again, flow is kind of awkward here. maybe Ctrl + G the (5)?
- 05:14:012 (4) – shouldn’t there be a NC here?