it took me long enough lmaO
m4m from my queue? your queue? i think both xd
00:01:343 (1,2,3) - why do you map this differently from 00:04:086 (1) - when its the same sound? i hear the echo, and if anything it's more audible in the second part since it doesn't have that bass under it. i would just change (1,2,3) to another long slider. if you want to map each echo to be clickable, you could do something with equal sliders like:
00:04:086 (1) - the top part of this could be curved slightly differently, but that's just my opinion
00:07:857 (1) - more consistency - keep this consistent with 00:10:600 (1,2) - . slight rhythm changes can be ok for variety, but these both represent drastically different sounds in the music.
00:15:057 (1) - this seems like rly large spacing for a pretty chill part of the song
00:32:457 (2,1) - i can't help but hear 1/6 rhythm here, maybe it's just me
00:39:743 (1,2) - its weird how you overlapped these here but not anywhere else
01:02:715 (7,8) - you could probably space this farther, i guess then you would have to change position of 01:03:057 (1) - but how it stands (7) and (8) seem really close
01:06:257 (2,3) - seems like pretty far spacing to me
01:10:257 (3,4,5) - you might want to distinguish between these kinda like you did with the jumps in the part before- they're all kinda different sounds + the music drops out a little on 01:10:943 (5) - but what is mapped doesn't really convey that. you did something similar with 01:21:229 (3,4,5,1) - , so maybe this would give you something to think about, though i don't like how 01:21:829 (5,1) - since there isn't really a sound on (5) and (1) doesn't need to be emphasized very much. it could be a solution though since it seems like you're using bursts for emphasis often.
01:16:600 (2,1,2,1,2) - this seemed really far spaced during testplay
01:19:343 (7) - you could map this like you mapped 01:08:372 (1) - , same with 01:30:315 (2) - , etc. keep consistency with how you emphasize things typically
01:28:429 (1,2,3,4,5) - maybe curve this up against the direction that (3) is facing? the way that (3) flows into this stream feels really weird
01:34:600 (1,1) - you don't need to NC each of these, just putting NCs on one or the other should be fine. i would put the NCs on the slider, but thats just me. same with at 02:18:486 (1) - aaaaaaaand 03:46:257 (1) -
01:40:429 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - this flows really weirdly since you need to move from (3) to (4) and then go to straight down movement. it's hard to explain but i feel like this could be placed better. like, for example:
02:22:257 (1) - remove NC
02:37:686 (1) - this spacing is pretty far too
03:09:915 (1,2) - i have some concerns about how this section is mapped. more specifically the sliders at 03:10:600 (1,2) - . i think some of the other ones make sense because on 03:11:629 (2) - the melody pauses, though at a place like 03:10:943 (2) - the melody is still playing a 1/2 rhythm, so extending it to 3/4 length wouldn't represent the song very well. i also wouldn't use all sliders here since you should distinguish where the melody pauses, so distinguish the difference between a circle and a slider.
03:17:457 (1,2,3,4) - this rhythm could use some work as well. if you're going to do the double on (2,3), you might as well do it for (4) as well. However, i would map it using 1/2 length sliders so the player can easily tell how long the slider is and when they should next click.
03:24:315 - there's a strong kick here, so i feel like it should be clickable
04:03:057 (2) - i dont understand why this is snapped to 1/8. 1/4 should be good enough
04:04:772 (1,2) - it seems like you map this sound differently a couple times - yes, variety is good, though the variety should at least stay somewhat consistent with how it's emphasizing sounds. for what it sounds like you're mapping, the sound should stop on 04:04:772 (1) - since that sound is not on 04:04:943 (2) - . for examples of consistency - you map it different from 04:07:515 (1) - , 04:09:057 (5,6,7) - , 04:10:429 (5,6) - , 04:11:800 (5,6,1,2) - , 04:15:743 (1) - , 04:17:286 (6,7) - , etc.
04:13:857 (1) - starting in this section, the times you decided to use the 1/8 sliders seemed kinda random to me. by about this point it seems like the sound is still there (though quite faint at this point), though you only mapped it at 04:15:229 (1,2,3) - and 04:20:715 (1,2,3,4) - . i would choose to either keep doing the 1/8 or not do it at all.
04:26:715 (1,2) - i think these can be 1/4
04:35:629 (1) - lower SV in this section thank
04:46:257 (1,2,3,4,1) - uhhhhhhh i think this spacing might be a little excessive but thats just my opinion xd
04:46:600 (1) - the loud synth sound that starts on this slider ends at around 04:49:343 - , so at this point i would probably start the 04:52:429 (1) - . cool sliderart, though i'm not sure if it represents the music perfectly.
overall i think your biggest problem is consistency, whether it be with spacing/rhythm. remember that variety in rhythm is okay as long as each rhythm is acceptable and not too far from one another. while both 04:04:257 (1,2,3,1,2) - and 04:13:857 (1,2,3,4,5) - can be acceptable rhythms for the part, switching up the two seems unusual considering they both portray a different kind of sound. if you want to emphasize these notes, then go for the first one. if you want to keep it simple, go for the second. but typically rhythms that are quite different i would not interchange. other than that, your structure and aesthetics are fairly good.
if you have any questions, feel free to pm me!
gl !