00:02:978 - Missing a note? // added! i kinda want some spacing emphasis but doesn't seems working
00:04:131 - Another missing note? // i'll keep this one
00:04:276 (4276|0) - Even with the stream coming up here its probably best to keep these sounds as doubles (This includes 00:04:564 - , 00:05:141 - , 00:05:285 - , 00:05:429 - , 00:05:718 - , etc etc as well) // added some as you suggested!
00:06:295 - Ya know, by all mapping conventions this technically isn't incorrect, but god damn if it isn't the most aggravating pattern in the game. If anything I'd delete 00:06:223 (6223|3) - this note because its not going to hurt
that much especially in the slowest part of the map // you right, removed!
00:07:016 - So this is a weird question but are you mapping the string guitar w/e thing? Because you've missed a bunch of notes specifically for that instrument and it seemed like you were. I'd go through this section again and make sure you aren't missing any notes on guitar sounds // i was thinking of 'oh monorhythm would be great to make a different kind of flow', but doesn't seems work too, so added!
00:09:179 - Why is this a double // synth? lelelel
00:09:396 - This sound does not exist // idk i can hear some cue sound
00:09:612 - This note should at least be a double given its significance (you could even maybe form a minijack with 00:09:684 - to accentuate the sound (This suggestion may also work for 00:06:151 - ) // okay
00:10:550 - Not sure if this exists or not // same, but i can hear some cue sound
00:11:199 - This 00:11:487 - 00:11:776 - should all very clearly be triples // i only put triples each 4 lines to layer the hi-hat
00:12:064 - That was a weird change. Relating this to the previous mod, you either accent all of the loud drum hits as triples or accent all of them as doubles with the guitar liokely being singles for both regardless. Choose something and stick with it. The doubles probably work better in general just because of the triples for the crashes at the end of each measure // i don't really like that kind of thought, also keeping this one because the reason above
00:22:809 - Confused about what this roll is going to // 1/4 & 1/6 polyrhythm, edgy one :^)
00:24:179 - This pattern is reaaaallly focused on columns 2 and 3 for no discernable reason. I wouldn't necessarily suggest changing it to a roll, since that would likely kill any difficulty that you desired here by putting it in, but the patterns should be reworked to focus less on 2 and 3 // nope, i ain't going to use any JS able 1/8, that will kill the challenge purpose
00:26:271 - Probably a ghost? // probably but it still the same sound like previous 1/4, will keep this
00:26:920 - You could afford an extra note here. Actually, I'll take this time just to suggest going through this part again with 50% speed to more clearly capture which beats have notes and which don't. What you have now is noticeably off in this respect // mmmmmmmmmm i'll think about that, i love the spacing emphasis i put here.
00:29:155 - Should be a double // the percussion is toned down here and so the song hype.. i'll keep
00:34:564 - If the three first notes of this portion are triples this sound (as well as any others that are the same sound) should be triples as well. (e.g. 00:34:853 - 00:35:141 - 00:35:429 - etc) // nah i'll keep this part with these consecutive double, that would somehow looks overly layered doe
00:38:242 - I'll agree with the minijack usage but the note should also ba a jump, probably a [14] or [24] to not be a straight [34][34] minijack, but make sure you avoid the next minijack at 00:38:314 - if you change (See 00:38:819 - as example) // mm i think i fixed this in some way
00:43:218 - I am going to be completely frank here, and I'm sorry if this sounds rude or unaccepting of your style, but these SVs just don't fit. I don't hear a specific sound that screams that it should have an SV, nor do I think the shift in tone between sections would justify the transition between no SVs to every note having a jump SV. Outside of that the section is fine, but the SVs could afford to not be there at all // well, first time i hear this song i was like "ok this is going to be great with SV", removing them will completely remove the initial intention i put, that would be really sad tbh :C
00:49:636 - This note probably shouldn't form a minijack given the earlier presented conventions // keep this, 2 consecutive percussion, and i love how it plays with current pattern hehe
00:51:944 - Ghost note probably? Hard to tell but I think it would feel better if the note were deleted // ok
00:55:550 - Same deal, kinda hard to tell but seems like a ghost note // ok
00:59:372 - This could probably be just a triple so that a note can be added at 00:59:444 - to start the stream where the sound starts in the song // ok
01:01:103 - Not sure I see the point in putting the glutt-y jumptrills here, probs would have just made it rolly dense jumpstream with a triple at 01:01:391 - // mmm nice <3
01:09:035 - Just want to say I really love the LN usage in this section, but also that there should probably be an ln stream starting here to continue your ln usage (plus an ln trill at 01:09:612 - to do the same) // ok
01:10:910 - Hmmmmmmmm. Not sure what to say here. Obviously the sounds somewhat support the jumps. Minijacks are *okay* too I suppose. 01:13:218 - For variety's sake I suppose you could change this 5 note chain to be [24] and [13] jumps instead, doesn't really hurt playability despite that. Its a bit awkward in general as a section, but not grossly overdone. I will say that it does serve as a difficulty increase between it and the section before it that is a bit more noticeably than it probably should be, but I can talk with some others and see what they think about that. // suuuuuuree i like the way you think :^D
01:15:526 - This section though. haha. Wow. Ok this needs a bit of cleaning up. The patterns do not play well and I'm also not sure why those two minijack patterns are in the initial parts of it. For the bursts such as at 01:16:391 - and 01:17:112 - it is most likely better to get rid of the jumps at the ends of them especially if there isn't a sound there. It supports the playability of the section by doing this while still maintaining a sufficient amount of intensity. The inverse after it is probably fine. If you would like a specific patterning suggestion for this section just ask but I won't give one for the time being // mmmm i think it should plays better now, lots of cleanup while reducing the note density is very minimum
01:20:718 - Would highly suggest making anything with this sound a double and anything with 01:21:295 - this sound a triple. If you listen closely those two are not the same and should be treated as such. This also allows you to make 01:24:756 - not a quad but rather a triple, which would vastly improve the playability here (The rest of the quads there would also likely be changed to triples) // ok, major cleanup here
01:27:064 - Oof that is a reeeeaaaaaalllllly long chain of these. Don't know if that is necessary but also don't have a separate suggestion right now outside of boiling it down to a regular jumptrill or just dense jumpstream, which I wouldn't really suggest here // no reason to change, sheriruth wasn't a mistake :^)
01:38:603 - I feel in this section that there should be a noticeable difference between the drum sounds and the synth sounds, which would lead me to suggest you change the synth to just be singles with the drum and snare hits to be doubles. You could also do some LN play here with the synth, since theres a noticeable volume and length increase, it could be a good showcase of LNs progressively increasing in length as the section goes on to reflect the sound. This would be especially useful to showcase the transition in style youre going for as shown through your ln choices from 01:47:833 - here on // i disagree, that way it will kills the variation i try to give for this chart
01:38:603 - Alright another really sad comment about these SVs. Same as before. I don't think they fit. They seem to fit noticeably better than the first section because of the introduction of the synth but the SVs don't do enough to properly represent them, nor do I think every synth should be represented by SVs. Usually in cases like this where the sounds by themselves don't convey something SV-worthy its up to the tone of the section to determine what should and shouldn't be SV'd, and in this case, the tone doesn't do enough for the section to support (especially these kinds of) aggressive SVs // same reason above, also this time the rougher sv are fitting the previous, less aggressive sv
01:55:333 - Not sure I agree with the minijack jumptrill here.// mmm i am making a build up with minijack
01:57:929 - Why did you change these to mini-LNs? Same synth sound and lengths as before, so should be mapped in the same way // i sacrifice the consistency here, my intention is to make this map is still interesting visually rather than forcing a technical approach on mapping (where i'm suck at it)
02:01:679 - I don't really agree with the way you extended some of these LNs here. I can hear the violin added to the background but that would likely be better represent by simply adding another LN as opposed to trying to arbitrarily lengthen the LNs representing the synth // same reason above, and actually i always map like this all because i love how it create a different flow.
02:06:151 - No sound here to support a minijack // rip jack, rose.. fixed!
02:07:160 - Same statement as before regarding LN lengths // same, will keep this
02:11:343 - This probably shouldn't be a quad because it doesn't layer all the same sounds as the one before it, though i personally dont think any of them should be quads, but rather push everything down a layer except the stuff thats already doubles or singles // mmmm major cleanup done!
02:11:631 - Same here //
02:14:372 - What was the point of making this a minijack? Straight jumptrill or dense jumpstream with a simpler transition into the jumprill change would probably work better // creating some other kind of different build up, i rearranged it in some other way and it should be simpler now
02:23:819 - Same as before, where these probably don't have to be quads, and triples would likely suffice (especially with this 02:24:612 - ) // i'll keep this
02:28:651 - Why the minijack? // identity of this map :^)
02:29:372 - Same comment regarding the quads here // same, i want to make it denseee D:
02:29:660 - Could be a single probably // mmm nope, reason above
02:31:175 - this and 02:31:391 - should be singles // keep
02:31:607 -
// aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
02:33:122 - lol where did the note go // oh that's for the fainted percussion sound over the synth sound, different kind of flow for variation
02:33:554 - why minijack tho // reason above
02:36:295 - This ln section right here kinda feels overkill and also like there was a bit of a random introduction of super dense LN patterning. The pattern right before it feels similar but i can kinda see where you are coming from with it. Consider toning this portion down, this goes for a large part of this section // i disagree, the super dense ln patterning are meant to maintain the player's hype because previous part was rough with those quads, reducing them will kill that purpose
02:40:622 - Take right here, for example, where there are double LNs in places that right after it, at 02:41:631 - , there are single LNs. Gotta stay consistent my man, and also keep the LN play relevant to what you are working with // mm keep, reason above
02:42:497 - This LN stream is probably fine though, for example, because it is one note per synth sound and there is a significant emphasis on the volume here that supports the increased length // :^) thanks
02:50:141 - No offense but this patterning is actually disgusting and is also an extremely unnecessary spike in difficulty. You're better off doing one of those minijack jumptrills from earlier (even though that probably still isn't favorable) // same reason above, this time i want to keep the identity of what challenge is, also reducing the spike will kills the purpose of overall structure i designed for this map.
02:51:439 - Missing a note // mm it was intentional