Grand Etude00:07:158 (8) - I'm not really a fan of how you're using kicksliders here. You play them just like you would a circle... click and release. Play-wise it just feels so similar to all the other circle jumps you already use here. I would use triplets instead for some rhythmic diversity. Applies to other sliders in this section too.
00:18:408 (1,2,3,4) - This is good. Spacing increase for pitch. Match this with a lower spacing on 00:19:008 (1,2) - though, otherwise you lose the effect completely due to how large these two jumps are.
00:19:908 (1,2,3,4) - How about flipping 00:19:308 (1,2,3,4) - and using the same spacing design here? It fits the melody anyways. Just an idea.
00:35:508 (1) - Not going to position it lower like 480||242 and complete the pattern?
00:51:708 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I don't see why the spacing increases going into the second pattern. If anything, it should decrease due to the lack of instruments on the second iteration..
00:55:308 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - ^
01:00:408 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2) - Can't really explain your intention for using different patterns and spacings here.
01:01:308 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - The spacing here is quite inconsistent too.
01:02:058 (2) - No emphasis onto this note?
01:05:808 (5,6) - Jumping from sliderhead to sliderhead doesnt seem like a good idea imo. It creates too big of a jump difference. Slider > Slider jumps are far easier than circle > circle jumps
01:07:008 (1,2,3,4) - Carrying on from the previous point, the spacing you use for 3>4 becomes so large that it overshadows your jumps from 01:07:908 - onward... 01:07:908 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - These make a lot of sense, and play really well, but following 01:07:608 (3,4) - they lose their importance.
01:11:208 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - These are just way too big for no reason
.
01:21:858 (6,1) - Continuing on about the kicksliders from my first point, you can see how emphasis is really lost onto 1 because you use kicksliders isntead of triplets.
02:00:108 (2) - Going by your NC pattern, you should be NC"ing here. 02:00:408 (1) - Remove NC and NC 02:00:708 (4) - instead.
02:27:108 (6,7,1,2,3,4) - These felt really cluttered together, Can you spread the pattern out more?
Second half of the map is a looot better. Really, nothing to say. Good job.
Magnificent00:16:233 (5) - Spacing is inconsistent here.
00:22:458 (4) - You were doing so well ;c. I really think triplets are better. You introduced the sectio with a triplet too, with 00:21:558 (1,2,1) - .
00:57:408 (2,1,2) - I think these overlaps are too close. They were hard to read for me.
00:58:608 (1,2) - I would swap NC's and maybe consider NC spam on 00:58:908 - etc... every 2 notes so players are more aware of the spacing increase pattern.
01:51:708 (1,2,3) - Somehow, this curve just looks really irregular to me, like you didnt use a slider conversion tool here or something xP.
01:57:333 (4,1) - Spacing appears irregular compared to the stream.
02:23:208 (1,2,3) - Uneven spacing.
02:23:808 (2) - ^ I guess since you scaled the pattern up, all of them end up being slightly off xP.
02:28:608 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - This felt really lame. How about going back to 1/4 repeats again or something? You built up to this part with a lot of jumps with increasing spacing so I think people are expecting something a bit more dense.
02:33:858 - Was this break intentional?
03:01:083 (2) - Remove this and begin the stream when the piano begins (on 03:01:158 - ).
03:02:733 (12,1) - This jsut isn't good imo. Putting a 1/4 jump like this really messes up players.
03:04:526 (6,1) - ^
Fabulous00:18:858 - How about mapping this? Maybe put the circle in the center of the triangle? Hmm it seems like you neglect this note later too, I don't think this is a good choice though xP. Maybe you have a reason tho.
00:22:308 (5,1) - Good. Do the same for 00:23:208 (3,1) - with the overlap?
00:31:308 (3,1) - Overlap here can be better too.
00:51:258 (4,6) - This is quite close together. It's closer than 00:50:958 (2,5) - so you might want to space them farther for that symmetriy pattern,
01:19:908 (3,1) - Overlap can be more precise here too. 01:17:208 (6,1) - This is good.
01:21:708 (3,1) - ^
02:17:808 (1) - This can be a lot better honestly. The slider-borders are so uneven.
Intense01:04:908 (1,2) - It's really easy to mistake this for a 1/2 jump because a note on 01:05:058 - definitely exists, and the spacing really resembles a 1/2 jump like 01:03:708 (3,1) -
01:06:558 (2,1) - I think this jump is way too big. Make it smaller because the pitch continues to go up and up, yet the spacings you use later aren't as large.
03:08:806 (1) - Can you rotate the slider a bit more, or make the head more visible? It's hard to tell whether you should go clockwise or counterclockwise because the head and tail are really close together and theyre obstructed.
Tough00:04:008 (1,2,1,2) - Blankets can be better.
00:20:658 (2,1) - ^
00:34:308 (1) - Okay this is definitely unrankable because of how ambiguous the slider-track is. There is no inside edge to the slider at all, so you can't tell where to go just by looking at the slider.
AverageGood.
Soft03:48:406 (1) - This is not enough spinner recovery time imo. You should have 4 beats (one full measure) of break for a beginner. It doesn't help that the next circle is almost at the edge of the screen. If you won't change the spinner length, then please make the circle near the center of the screen.
[]
Alright, that should be all. I'm concerned about the highest two diff's still... I'll see what you have to say first though, and whether you plan on making changes etc...