._.
modあり!_yu68 wrote:
こんにちは~
[Absolute Oni]頑張って╭( ・ㅂ・)و
- 00:02:748 - 00:09:595 - 00:23:834 - 00:37:421 - SV 1.10x -> 1.00x? この1/4が微妙に重なったスクロールが長く続くと見た目が汚い(ものすごい個人的な感想ですが)keep
- 00:22:965 (27) - change to don? dkの変わり目を1/2のキックに合わせると叩きやすくなると思います。fixed
- 01:17:856 (4) - 01:18:182 (7) - delete? メロディの付点リズムを偶数打で強調することでプレイ感の向上に繋がると思います。(削除の提案はあくまで一例です)keep
- 01:22:421 (15,16) - ctrl+g? 個人的にボーカルをより意識しやすくなるように感じます。01:36:334 (16,17) - との統一も兼ねて。fixedだけど、変化は入れたい
- 01:39:595 (12,13) - ctrl+g? 01:25:682 (6,7) - と統一してもいいかも?変化も入れたいし個人的に変えた
- 01:48:617 - 02:13:938 - 02:15:749 - SV 1.10x -> 1.00x? 冒頭と同様の理由です。keep
- 02:15:423 (25,26) - 02:15:640 (28,29) - change to kat and 02:15:785 (1) - change to don? キックに合わせる提案です。02:29:264 (22,23,24,25,26,27,1) - と逆配色にしたい
- 02:42:198 (4) - 02:42:525 (7) - delete? 1番と同様の理由です。keep
- 02:46:764 (28,29) - ctrl+g? 1番と同様の理由です。fixed
- 03:00:351 (14) - delete? 今までのパターンから偶数打が消えた構成になっているので、盛り上がり・プレイ感に欠けるようにも思います。前までのパターンより密度を上げるための配置なら、この部分を奇数打で塗り潰すのではなく他の部分( 03:00:895 - など)を肉付けする形でも良いかと。考え中
- 03:07:308 (15) - delete? ^ ^
- 03:17:416 - 03:25:732 - 03:40:242 - 03:53:775 - SV 1.10x -> 1.00x? 冒頭と同様の理由です。^
- 03:54:373 (4) - 03:54:699 (7) - delete? 1番と同様の理由です。^
- 03:56:384 (19) - delete? SV変化と相まって叩きにくいと感じました。ボーカル合わせ/SS難易度を上げるという意図だとしてもその叩きにくさがプレイヤーにとってストレスになる可能性があるように思います。そういう仕様です
modアリです!EdamaMe411 wrote:
こんばんわ~。見たところモッドは集まっているようですし、ざっと見た感じ悪くないので個人的に帰任った配色等を中心に見ていきたいと思います。
また。今回はあまり書かない様式?で書いていきたいので、見にくかったらごめんなさい。
[Absolute Oni]以上です。初めてこの譜面いただいた時よりも格段に良くなっていますね
- 01:21:008 (5,6) - Ctrl+G。単にボーカルの音程なのですが、「Wish♪」がそれなりに高いので、dkddkよりも優先度がたかい様な気がします。後ろの音に合わせていると思いきや、バックでもボーカルと合わせたためか高音が鳴っているので、変えることをお勧めします。 同じ強調している01:20:139 (1) - と同じ色ということを考えるとdのほうが適切だと思っています。
- 01:30:791 (2) - k。これも上と同じ理由で、これに同意した場合、01:30:899 (3) - ここを消去することをお勧めします。理由として第一サビなのでできるだけノーツ密度をラスサビで魅せたいため、前半は控えたいという点/置くために十分な音が聞こえない点の2点があげられます。01:31:008 - も強調したいので
- 01:31:117 (4) - d?上を考慮した場合の色ですね。特に高くないのですが、これは個人的に良いかな、程度の提案です。^
- 01:50:682 (16) - delete。理由は、01:50:573 (15) - ここのシンセがとても大きく聞こえる部分なのでどうしても独立した音で表現してあげるのがいいと考えたからです。01:50:573 (15) - からつなげてしまうとせっかくの強い音も流されてしまうイメージなので、ここはムリにつなげず切ったほうがいいと判断しました。fixed
- 01:53:073 (10) - delete。おそらく01:48:834 (4) - こことのリフレインパートで区別するために詰めたノーツだと思うんですが、サビでもないので、べつに同密度でも構わないと思います。無理につなげるより、若干の配色変更のみのほうがプレイングとしては快適になると思います 01:52:856 - を消しました
- 03:24:699 (10,11) - dd。明らかにタムが低く聞こえるのですが、どうでしょう nice!
- 03:25:568 (18) - 上と同じ理由でここはスネアが強く、音取自体もドラム合わせのようですので、kを強くお勧めします。ここ自体スネアはdで取っているので問題ないかと
- 03:32:308 (18) - ここからの16分と03:32:742 (22) - かあらの24分の違いの意味が分かりませんでした。ほぼ同じスネアの音量であるため、明確な理由がない場合はどちらかに統一したほうがいいと思います。僕ならこう置くのもありかなと思います パターンの化のためkeepかな
https://puu.sh/ukJrz.jpg- 03:42:525 (12) - 03:46:003 (12) - にあるのと03:40:786 - にノーツがない理由がわかりませんでした 統一をお勧めします。特に変化を求めるようなパートでもないので、、、 密度が低いとplayerは退屈すると思うので変化を入れています
- 04:07:308 (2) - k。ハイハット?ライド?の音取優先のほうが聞こえがいいかと 一番と同様に
- 04:37:308 (17,18) - Ctrl+G。バックのシンセの音程取りのほうがいいと思います、一番大きく聞こえているパートです fixed
- 上に伴って提案するならば、04:37:525 (18) - と04:37:851 (20) - は同じ音程なので、04:37:742 (19,20,21) - はdkdがおすすめです ^
- 04:46:221 (6) - ここからの配色が気になったため音程に合わせて自分なりに色変えてみたのですが、どうでしょう
https://puu.sh/ukKi3.jpg04:32:308 (6,7,8,9) - と同じような配色のほうがいいかなと思います
配色等意識していくことでよりよい譜面になると思っております。頑張ってranked目指してくださいね
modアリです!JUDYDANNY wrote:
Hello, M4M hi==
And, sorry 3times post..Post bag... orzIntroduction
1/6とfinisherとの兼ね合いが疑問です
- 偶数打の一貫性が不足してます
- 大音符の一貫性が1番と2番で変わってます、変化をつけるならもっと流れに変化を..
後半に行くにつれてのkiaiのkの配置が蛇足感があります(dkkdk系の部分)、もう少し流れに沿わせた方がよいかと..- やはり難易度作りのバランスが気になります 局所難を責めているわけではないですが、どう見ても明らかに局所難という部分と他との差がありすぎて.. 1/6も長いですし もう少し簡略化を図った方がいいと思います
Symbol meaning
| >> Little question and small suggestion.
>> idea lolor JUST MY OPINION.
- >> Normal suggestion.
Big text >> Strong suggestion.
>> Questionable imo.
>>> Needs to improve some. (Rhythm is not good , plays or sounds weird)
No comment >>simple (you can notice easily: just hits on drums or simple beats) , or already explained on the other place.[Timing]
03:46:003 (12) - もっとガッツリ減速掛けましょう... イントロよりもバックの音の種類は少ないので曲調的にcalmerでいいはずです fixed[Inner Oni]
- 01:47:041 - 95%のままでもよいと思います 2ndも同様。^
- 00:22:965 (27,28,29) - dkdにchange or ddk, kddkkkdのパターン云々よりもその前のdkkdkの1/4に疑問が残ります。落ち着いているのでピッチ・バス音ともにフォローするためにd音もう少し多めに。fixed
- 00:28:291 (6,7) - kd? for consistency with 00:24:813 (6,7) - .^
- 00:51:298 (26,27,1) - (26,27) remove ⅙, (1) change finisher. 大音符のバランスが非常に気になる..1/6を無理に繋げなくてもカバーは出来ると思いますし01:04:921 (22,23,24,25,26,27,1) - とパターンを組みたいです。
- 02:15:568 (27,28,29,1) - same.02:15:351 (24,25,26,27,28,29,1) - ^
- 00:54:378 - change to d, and 00:54:921 - change K ? fixed
00:57:856 (23,24) - dk? なんかものすごくやりにくいと思ったら。。そもそも1/4の配色がおかしい気がする.. 1/4だけのリズムを考えたらdk-dkの方が十分に合うと思うんですが...これまでの流れを考えたら.. ここはパターンも考えていろいろ考えます。
00:59:269 (5,6,7,8,9,10) - change to, d-ddk-d-K or dk-dk-d-K? 周辺のパターンは任せますが..ボーカルの高さとここ周辺のmappingを見たらfinisherの Kが最優先事項だと思われます。
また偶数に関しては ここだけ意図的に配置したのかわかりませんが,,,少し疑問です。これは似た部分の繰り返しがkiai手前まで同じパターン続いてるので気になった部分だけ提案続きます
(dk-dkに関しては01:07:965 (16,17,18,19) - あたりを参照に) fixed
- 01:01:226 - move to ¼ left..? 偶数2-2の配置を前者でした場合。
- 01:10:791 - ^
- 01:16:008 (2,3,4,5) - そして同じように(2)の位置のブレイクはほしい... ここのパターンをKから始めてK-dk-dk → K--dk-d or K--kk-d ? fixed
- K--kkを取った場合01:16:878 - も意図的にchange kすると個性もあり、変化をどこでっとりたいかしっかりインパクトにもなると思います 第二kiaiでの変化に使います(*'ω'*)
- 01:27:312 (21,22) - change to (remove,d).
- 01:41:225 (2,3) - same, fixed 01:41:986 (6,7,8,9,10) - change to dkdkkd-(kd-kkdk or kk-dkkd)? , ここはよくわからないので後で聞こうかな
- 01:02:965 (6,7,8,9) - change ddk-d or kdk-d? これまで01:03:400 (9,10) - こういった配色を意図的に避けてるようにも見えますし.. 一貫性で?fixed
- 01:05:211 (26,27,1) - kk remove, d finisher? パート間での大音符との折り合いで。考えます
01:19:994 (29,30) - remove 再三言ってますが、大音符との兼ね合いです 一応こういう大音符配置のranked譜面はありますしbpmも同様に低いので許容されると思う。。。けど。。。 https://osu.ppy.sh/b/307654&m=1- 01:26:950 (20,21,1) - same. finisherも必要だと思います 01:20:139 - と比べて強調する必要はないと思います。
- 01:40:863 (26,27,1) - same. ^
- 01:47:820 (35,36,1) - same. ^
- 01:33:617 (24,25,26,27,28,1) - change to (⅙)dddk-””-D? うーんdddkにすると叩きにくいのと、上と同様に強調する必要もないかなと思います。
- 01:19:124 - d? と言いたいですが..01:19:124 - 01:19:197 - は削ってもいい気がします(余った4打の1/6はdddkで?) 聞いてみてもそこまで重要度が高いようにも聞こえない
削ってプレイしてもメリハリという意味ではつきそうです。自分の考えでは、03:55:351 (13,14,15,16,17,18) - は音が下がっているのと比べて01:18:834 (13,14,15,16,17,18) - では音が上がっているので、変化をつけるためにddkdkkが最適だと思います。それにSV変化によって分けているので、メリハリも多分問題ないかと。- 01:20:791 (4,5) - either change k? ボーカルのメリハリがつきすぎてるので.. うーむ。。パターンの問題もあるので、考えます。
- 01:27:747 (23,24) - ^ 5連打も少し見直した方がいいと思います. k-ddkdk ? ^
- 02:03:612 (2,3) - kd? ボーカル配置をしてないので素直にバックのピッチに合わせた方が自然だと思います。03:15:786 - のように。 fixed
- 02:10:568 (8,9) - same. ^
- 02:17:959 - remove, 1/4までは必要ないと思います, 4拍子にこれ以上置いたらドラムっぽくなってしまう.. ^
- 02:21:438 - same. ^
- 02:18:177 (9,10,11) - k-d-d? 個人的に変えてみました
- 02:19:264 - K? fixed
- 02:23:612 - ~~ 02:44:481 - まで1回目と提案箇所は全く同じ、sameです。同様に修正[/list:1337]
time stamps
- 02:23:612 (5,6,7,8,9,10) -
- 02:25:568 -
- 02:26:003 (18,1) - k-D?
- 02:27:307 (6,7,8,9) -
- 02:29:554 (26,27,1) -
- 02:31:655 -
- 02:40:351 (2,3,1,2) -
- 02:40:133 - , 02:41:003 - K じゃないのは仕様?変えた
- 02:43:177 (13,14,15,16,17,18) -
- 02:44:409 (12,13) -
- 2番目のkiaiも基本的には同じです。ほぼ被ってるのでtimestampだけ
timestamps
- 02:51:293 (25,26,1) -
- 02:52:308 (6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - ddkdkkk?
- 02:57:960 (24,25,26,27,28,1) -
- 03:06:221 - 周辺→D--dk-k-dkddkkd-kddkkdk ? https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/7453419 03:07:090 (12,16,19) - ここを同じ色にしないと違和感が出ると思います。
- 02:49:482 (9,10) - k-D?
- 03:26:112 (23,1) - remove-D?
03:34:482 (9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19) - no ⅓ mapping? 自分もちょっと違和感があったけど1/3は無いかなと思ったので個人的に変えてみました。
3rdのkiaiもカットで
- 04:24:482 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - not ¼ dkdkdkdk?それか2拍ごとに1/4→1/6→1/4→1/6のパターンでもいっそいい気はします.. そこまで音が強くない.. うーんこれまで指摘されなかったので、違和感は無い気がしますが…一応密度を減らしてみました。
- 04:45:351 - remove finish ここは強調が必要な気がします
- 04:34:699 - , 04:41:656 - ,04:48:612 - もう少し簡易化を図っては?ピークが終わったのに対し、ここも難易度が高いままなのは気になる..特に1・3回目。ピークが終わったとはいえ一応kiaiなのでkeepかな…
APP目指すなら他のBNにもしっかり意見を取った方がいいと思います。
Good Luck.
thank you for modding!!Nofool wrote:
really cool map, mostly personnal pref suggestions/maybe SV changes could be made better
[Absolute Oni]
* - 00:10:574 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) - try dk kddk dk kd? fits better melody/emphasize - 00:11:552 - as k. fixed
* - 00:17:530 (4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) - ^.^
* - 00:22:639 (24,25) - swap colors? i think kdkdk plays well with the melody. fit to dram
* - 00:34:704 - sad to miss vocal because - 00:33:834 (17,18,1) - follows vocal. try moving - 00:35:030 (6) - to - 00:34:595 - as d, and also add k at - 00:35:900 - ? => fits more vocal and other sections like - 00:25:682 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -.fixed
* - 01:17:530 - to - 01:20:139 - i think the stream would look better with progressive speed up. same for all similar streams before kiais.I could not understand the meaning
* - 01:30:791 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - change to dk k D ? as you did at - 01:23:943 (2,3,4,5) -, i think it plays better. pattern change
* (important) - 01:48:399 (3) - x1.20SV green line is not working here because snapped one ms too late. change its offset to 108399.fixed
* - 02:14:590 (17) - i think you can keep it as d, ddkkddkkddkk monotony isnt bad here.I think it's too simple.
* - 02:55:134 (2,3,4,5,6) - as suggested in first kiai, remove 1st and 4th note ? ddkdk => dk k, emphasize previous finisher as you did at - 02:47:960 (1,2,3,4) -.01:30:791 (2,3,4,5,6) - same as
* - 03:12:416 - to - 03:19:264 - i think you can make a cool speed up here. => change - 03:12:416 - line to x0,90SV, and then make a progressive speed up from - 03:17:525 (3) - to - 03:19:264 (1) - (x0,94 to x1,10 => + 0,01 for each 1/4 tick)? i think it looks cool and fits the song.thinking
* - 03:31:329 (11,12) - swap colors? fits better the melody. dram follow
* - 03:55:786 - sure about no d here? no
* - 04:07:090 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - D ddkkd D => D -dk d K ? refer to my other suggestions in kiais/emphasize the first D. same
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
good luck!
modアリです~iceOC wrote:
hi~ from game-in chat
遅くなってすみません
初Modです(大嘘)
[General]
d = don
k = kat
D and K = big note
[Absolute Oni]
00:49:052 (6) - delete 00:47:965 (1,2,3) のリズムに合わせるほうが自然かなと思いました。fixed
01:01:226 (15,16,17) - kkd? 前の小節の反転パターンのほうが自然だと思いました。少し音に合わないような気がします。
02:17:851 (8) - delete ここは消してbigを主張させる方が自然かなと思いました。一番と比べて変化が必要だと思います
02:22:742 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - ここと00:58:400(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)を同じにしてはどうでしょうか。vocalが変化しているので変化が必要だと思います
02:53:829 (17) - d 似た配置 01:43:399 (17) もdだったので。01:29:160 (13,14,15,16) - と比較するのはわかりますが、そこと比較するのはあまり良いとは思いません
02:54:916 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - D ddkkd D ddk 01:30:573 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10)と04:07:090 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10)がこの配置なので。02:56:221 (10)は音が高いのでdkkでもいいかもしれませんが。第一,第三kiaiとは歌詞が違うのでそれの変化を表現しているつもりです。
時間かけた割にあんまり指摘できなくてスマン
JUDYDANNY wrote:
#1Recheck Log 【Japanese】
- 12:08 JUDYDANNY: こんにちわ~ :3 absolute wishはじめますね
12:10 yassu-: 了解です~
- 12:29 JUDYDANNY: 01:05:682 (2,3,4,5) - kd-k-d? , 01:09:487 (4,5) - dk? , 01:12:639 (2,3) - kd?
12:30 JUDYDANNY: 1つ前の00:58:400 (1,2,3,4) - D--kd-kとかあたりと比較してよーく聞いてみても見てみても なんか配色・打音ともにスッキリしない
12:33 yassu-: うーむ- 12:33 JUDYDANNY: 2番目も同じように
12:38 yassu-: 変更しました~
- 12:33 JUDYDANNY: 02:23:068 (2,3) - kd? 02:24:807 (11,12) - dk? 02:26:546 (2,3) - kd?
- 12:33 JUDYDANNY: 02:30:025 (2,3,4,5,6) - kddk-d? 02:33:503 (2,3,4,5,6) - dkkd-k? 02:36:981 (2,3) - kd?
- 12:38 JUDYDANNY: 02:18:177 (9,10) - kd? ♪け~め~ぐり~ →down to down.
12:40 yassu-: ok- 12:42 JUDYDANNY: 03:47:525 (3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - dkd-k-dk--kっ的な感じでもう少し物量感をへしてほしい..
- 12:42 JUDYDANNY: でここから同じように 03:50:134 - remove, 03:51:003 (3,4,5,6) - dkd-kに して
12:42 JUDYDANNY: 段々とビルドアップ的な
12:42 JUDYDANNY: (ビルドアップし始める密度をもう少し落としたいというか)
12:46 yassu-: ok
12:52 JUDYDANNY: http://puu.sh/uDB5M/c87aa7b135.png
12:52 yassu-: ふむ。。。
12:52 JUDYDANNY: 被ってる2つめ 03:47:090 - を削除で
12:52 JUDYDANNY: それか80%のミス?
12:55 yassu-: 削除しました- 13:03 JUDYDANNY: Nanjo Yoshino 南條愛乃
13:03 JUDYDANNY: 入れた方が無難ですtagに
13:04 yassu-: あぁ、了解です
13:06 JUDYDANNY: これでアップお願いします~
thank youSurono wrote:
recheck
01:47:095 (25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,1) - and 03:11:438 (25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,1) - this burst stream really too over imo and the sounds flow of 1/6 are "weak"
change like this screenshot: http://puu.sh/wBra9/db77f04a8c.jpg dkkkd 1/4 are to emphasize the flow sounds, it still makes sense on following drum 1/4 and so that 03:11:873 - dkkdkkd 1/6 are mapped for 1/6 drum *not only flowsounds*
01:18:834 - the 1/8 drums are just 01:18:943 - 01:18:997 - 01:19:052 - so I think its too over if you put simpler pattern in 01:19:124 - 01:19:197 - , change like this ss http://puu.sh/wBrvO/f8a224fe8e.jpg 01:18:834 - from here
02:43:177 - like above
03:55:496 - wrong emphasized, 03:55:568 - should be swap with this
04:27:742 - I dont think its 1/6, the flows of pitch are simple/weak. should be kkd
all fixed
call me back for rebubble
thank you Surono ~~~~~~~ ^^^^Surono wrote:
rebubbled
I agreed with Juda says.Surono wrote:
hmm you bring back some of them again and something I dont know 00:22:747 - maybe or nevermind, well its needed rebubble but not from me because I disagreed.
good luck
JUDYDANNY wrote:
[*]01:47:095 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , 03:11:438 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , return the 1/6 flows.
[*]00:22:747 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , 02:01:008 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , 03:39:264 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - change the 1/6 flows.
These are following the synthesizer, not only drums. like 01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) - them.
And, its for adjustment the same 1/6 strategy "" 04:24:482 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , 04:25:351 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - , and 04:54:916 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - ""
(Because they're not mentioned.We can adjust, and we decided to change them.)[/list]
Raiden wrote:
00:22:747 (25,26,27,28,29,30,31) - This should be 1/4, I see absolutely no reason to use 1/6 here. These are following the synthesizer. not only drums →Talked with Juda (and Juda asked Nardo about them a little).
00:20:139 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24) - In fact, I see also little reason to make this a full 1/4 stream considering the density you used previously was -at best- 9plets. The buildup idea is fine, the execution is not imo. Follow of drum,and I also want to direct the gap of the density of the part after this. It will makes player feel more like a quiet part.
01:18:834 - This SV up is done in a suboptimal way. You should probably smooth it out. I do not want to smoothen SV up for finish at 01: 20: 139 -, and 01:18:834 - Expression of drum change by SV up
01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,1) - melody does not do 1/6 unlike in 01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) - so, again, I see little reason to be 1/6. Should be 1/4. The actual melody sounds 1/8, but truly 1/8 putting is impossible to ranked. Since 1/8 can not be expressed well in 1/4, I set 1/6.
01:40:139 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) - same issue ^ ^
02:01:008 (25,26,27,28,29,30,31) - Same issue as the first one. This is not 1/6 same same
01:58:399 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25) - Same as 2nd issue ^
03:11:438 (25,26,27,28,29,30) - Same, it's not 1/6 till 03:11:873 (31) - same
03:39:264 (25,26,27,28,29,30) - Same ^ ^
03:53:721 (21) - there is actually no note here but it works as a connection I guess 03:47:090 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) → 03:48:829 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19) → 03:50:568 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) → 03:52:308 (12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23) - buildup
03:55:351 (13,14,15,16) - ??? where are the 1/6 now? lol 02:43:177 (13,14,15,16) - 01:18:834 (13,14,15,16) - pattern
and same for last kiai
I can't really agree with the 1/6 usage in this specific map and I'd like this to have more opinions before being it's moved to ranked.
Considering that technically no change was made for this map and that it could technically become requalified without further moderation, I am placing a pop on JUDY's bubble to prevent it from being valid unther further argumentation is made or until you find a 3rd person that agrees with you. Let's find more opinions, shall we? I am sadly not very convinced with your argumentation.yassu- wrote:
Raiden wrote:
00:22:747 (25,26,27,28,29,30,31) - This should be 1/4, I see absolutely no reason to use 1/6 here. These are following the synthesizer. not only drums →Talked with Juda (and Juda asked Nardo about them a little). synthesizer is not doing any 1/6. My point still stands. Should be 1/4.
00:20:139 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24) - In fact, I see also little reason to make this a full 1/4 stream considering the density you used previously was -at best- 9plets. The buildup idea is fine, the execution is not imo. Follow of drum,and I also want to direct the gap of the density of the part after this. It will makes player feel more like a quiet part. I do not understand you. If you want to make it feel like a build up, make it denser progressively, not just jump from triplets-quints to a full on deathstream.
- 00:20:900 (8) -
- 00:21:769 (16) -
Delete those notes for a more appropriate build up
01:18:834 - This SV up is done in a suboptimal way. You should probably smooth it out. I do not want to smoothen SV up for finish at 01: 20: 139 -, and 01:18:834 - Expression of drum change by SV up Expression of drum by making the snap almost unreadable? Not buying this one, at all.
01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,1) - melody does not do 1/6 unlike in 01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) - so, again, I see little reason to be 1/6. Should be 1/4. The actual melody sounds 1/8, but truly 1/8 putting is impossible to ranked. Since 1/8 can not be expressed well in 1/4, I set 1/6. Melody does 1/8 in the FIRST iteration, it does NOT on the second. Not buying this one, either.
01:40:139 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) - same issue ^ ^
02:01:008 (25,26,27,28,29,30,31) - Same issue as the first one. This is not 1/6 same same
01:58:399 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25) - Same as 2nd issue ^
03:11:438 (25,26,27,28,29,30) - Same, it's not 1/6 till 03:11:873 (31) - same
03:39:264 (25,26,27,28,29,30) - Same ^ ^
03:53:721 (21) - there is actually no note here but it works as a connection I guess 03:47:090 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) → 03:48:829 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19) → 03:50:568 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) → 03:52:308 (12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23) - buildup
03:55:351 (13,14,15,16) - ??? where are the 1/6 now? lol 02:43:177 (13,14,15,16) - 01:18:834 (13,14,15,16) - pattern They are certainly not the same, so 1/6 is missing here.
and same for last kiai
I can't really agree with the 1/6 usage in this specific map and I'd like this to have more opinions before being it's moved to ranked.
※I'm not good at English. So there are times when my opinion can not be conveyed well. There are times when I can not understand what you are saying. Still I would like to talk about each other until I agree.Raiden wrote:
00:22:747 (25,26,27,28,29,30,31) - This should be 1/4, I see absolutely no reason to use 1/6 here. These are following the synthesizer. not only drums →Talked with Juda (and Juda asked Nardo about them a little). synthesizer is not doing any 1/6. My point still stands. Should be 1/4.
→ok..
00:20:139 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24) - In fact, I see also little reason to make this a full 1/4 stream considering the density you used previously was -at best- 9plets. The buildup idea is fine, the execution is not imo. Follow of drum,and I also want to direct the gap of the density of the part after this. It will makes player feel more like a quiet part. I do not understand you. If you want to make it feel like a build up, make it denser progressively, not just jump from triplets-quints to a full on deathstream.
- 00:20:900 (8) -
- 00:21:769 (16) -
Delete those notes for a more appropriate build up
→i deleted 00:20:682 - 00:21:552 - This can express build-up more.
01:18:834 - This SV up is done in a suboptimal way. You should probably smooth it out. I do not want to smoothen SV up for finish at 01: 20: 139 -, and 01:18:834 - Expression of drum change by SV up Expression of drum by making the snap almost unreadable? Not buying this one, at all.
→01:18:834 - 02:43:177 - SV change green line deleted
01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,1) - melody does not do 1/6 unlike in 01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) - so, again, I see little reason to be 1/6. Should be 1/4. The actual melody sounds 1/8, but truly 1/8 putting is impossible to ranked. Since 1/8 can not be expressed well in 1/4, I set 1/6. Melody does 1/8 in the FIRST iteration, it does NOT on the second. Not buying this one, either.
→I can't approve of 01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,1) - . most of the players are almost the same melody 01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) -. One thing that sounds like 1/4 is the fact that other sounds are mixed. The other is that 01:26:225 - is weaker than 01:19:269 - . But essentially the sound is the same.
03:55:351 (13,14,15,16) - ??? where are the 1/6 now? lol 02:43:177 (13,14,15,16) - 01:18:834 (13,14,15,16) - pattern They are certainly not the same, so 1/6 is missing here.
→Actually there are also 1/6 01:18:834 - 02:43:177 - , But 1/6 is prominent at 03: 55: 351 - , i added 03:55:351 - 1/6
Considering that technically no change was made for this map and that it could technically become requalified without further moderation, I am placing a pop on JUDY's bubble to prevent it from being valid unther further argumentation is made or until you find a 3rd person that agrees with you. Let's find more opinions, shall we? I am sadly not very convinced with your argumentation.
Have a good day.
→I can't approve of 01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,1) - . most of the players are almost the same melody 01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) -. One thing that sounds like 1/4 is the fact that other sounds are mixed. The other is that 01:26:225 - is weaker than 01:19:269 - . But essentially the sound is the same.I can't approve it either. Sound is not the same. At all. It is entirely different. It's not weaker, it's different. Therefore 1/6 is not justified here. Not only it's wrong snap-wise, but it's also inconsistent, so the improvisation argument would not work in this case.
→ok. I follow the drums like 01:32:312 (11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) - .Raiden wrote:
→I can't approve of 01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,1) - . most of the players are almost the same melody 01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) -. One thing that sounds like 1/4 is the fact that other sounds are mixed. The other is that 01:26:225 - is weaker than 01:19:269 - . But essentially the sound is the same.I can't approve it either. Sound is not the same. At all. It is entirely different. It's not weaker, it's different. Therefore 1/6 is not justified here. Not only it's wrong snap-wise, but it's also inconsistent, so the improvisation argument would not work in this case.
The only justified 1/6 are:
01:19:269 (17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,1) -
02:43:612 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) -
The rest sound like 1/4 dkdkdkd. So my final stand is to make them 1/4 patterns.
Surono wrote:
I tried to make it sure
* 01:47:095 - ~ 01:47:457 - previously you said to overall follow drums? change it to 1/4 then, high burst sounds are from 01:47:530 - here, just like my pop post that I've pointd them b4. my suggestion: from 01:46:225 - here = dkddkkddkkdkd, it sounds not monotone imo. try, why not?
hmmm...keep.. dkddkkddkkdkd is not fit to drum. 01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,) - 01:33:182 (20,21,22,23,24) - I follow the sounds of this pattern.
* 03:10:568 - same above same
* 01:32:095 - 02:56:438 - 04:08:612 - feels awkward if you leave them empty. drum follow ^
just comment
when I pop'd it b4, my concern is about emphasized purpose on patterning. yeah now looks better to follow drum since the synth in there is weak, so safe. tbh im 01:26:225 - fine with previously snap cuz suppossed to follow synth than drum. but when I listen 01:47:095 - from here, this is actually my main concern.. different burst sound and weak synth thats actually seems over to mapped as 1/6 at all
call me back if you consindered to fix those 3 points.
yassu- wrote:
Surono wrote:
I tried to make it sure
* 01:47:095 - ~ 01:47:457 - previously you said to overall follow drums? change it to 1/4 then, high burst sounds are from 01:47:530 - here, just like my pop post that I've pointd them b4. my suggestion: from 01:46:225 - here = dkddkkddkkdkd, it sounds not monotone imo. try, why not?
hmmm...keep.. dkddkkddkkdkd is not fit to drum. 01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,) - 01:33:182 (20,21,22,23,24) - I follow the sounds of this pattern. but those are different, i meant 01:47:095 - ~ 01:47:965 - compare with 01:19:269 - ~ 01:20:139 - this because its more high on synth. 01:47:095 - ~ 01:47:457 - you should change it to 1/4 because its similar synth with 01:26:225 - ~ 01:27:095 - and i dont think there is 1/6 clearly sound or something high burst like 01:47:530 - ~ 01:47:965 - this,
* 03:10:568 - same above same ^
* 01:32:095 - 02:56:438 - 04:08:612 - feels awkward if you leave them empty. drum follow ^ there is hithat sound, if you still thought them is empty cuz only follow drum you should 01:28:617 - delete this etc. so add them to keep density
Surono wrote:
I tried to make it sure
* 01:47:095 - ~ 01:47:457 - previously you said to overall follow drums? change it to 1/4 then, high burst sounds are from 01:47:530 - here, just like my pop post that I've pointd them b4. my suggestion: from 01:46:225 - here = dkddkkddkkdkd, it sounds not monotone imo. try, why not?
hmmm...keep.. dkddkkddkkdkd is not fit to drum. 01:26:225 (10,11,12,13,14,) - 01:33:182 (20,21,22,23,24) - I follow the sounds of this pattern. but those are different, i meant 01:47:095 - ~ 01:47:965 - compare with 01:19:269 - ~ 01:20:139 - this because its more high on synth. 01:47:095 - ~ 01:47:457 - you should change it to 1/4 because its similar synth with 01:26:225 - ~ 01:27:095 - and i dont think there is 1/6 clearly sound or something high burst like 01:47:530 - ~ 01:47:965 - this, fixed?
* 03:10:568 - same above same ^ ^
* 01:32:095 - 02:56:438 - 04:08:612 - feels awkward if you leave them empty. drum follow ^ there is hithat sound, if you still thought them is empty cuz only follow drum you should 01:28:617 - delete this etc. so add them to keep density^
Surono wrote:
change diffname
Absolute Oni -> absolute oni to fit with capital letter of title song
ok,changed