Hi.
Reminder to downgrade your mp3, in case you haven't.
All of what follows is opinionated, following my own biases with respect to charting, and may not represent your original intentions.
With respect to consistency checks, Maxo is goddamn crazy, so all of the points I'll point out will be left to your own criteria.
With that said, I hope the observations (which are on the spot!) that follow have value to you. With that said, I do 1 through 4, left to right.
[Normal]
00:24:619 (24619|0,25024|0) - To follow the harmony chord going down, perhaps you want to do a 2-1 sequence instead of a 1-1.
00:17:727 - The chord at the background fills in at this point. A less observant player would probably confuse it with flowing into the 2-3-4 that comes afterwards. Perhaps add a note.
00:26:376 (26376|3) - Move to 1 to keep this ladder pattern consistent with the previous phrase, perhaps. I'm not too sure - but you might want it.
00:29:889 - There's a good reason not to include the 1 in here. Just noting that I noticed.
00:34:079 (34079|2,34079|3,34349|2,34349|3) - +clap sound?
00:34:619 (34619|1,34619|0) - +soft-whistle?
00:38:943 (38943|2,38943|1) - +finish sound? If so, possibly change the clap for a finish for consistency.
00:40:700 (40700|1,40970|1,41241|2,41511|2,41646|3) - I'd vouch for pitch relevancy, but this does follow the ladder theme.
00:43:673 (43673|0,43943|0,44214|0,44349|0,44619|0,44754|0,45024|0,45295|0) - But on the next phrase, you still use the 1-lane you used previously.
But then you do the ladder again, and start transitioning to the next phase of the song.
Welp, nevermind that.
01:15:970 (75970|3,76105|0) - You were using the 2 jumps to signify this, and I am not pointing out the point where you left out the jump because of this, but you drop it here. Given the focus the synth gets and that it'd mean you'd have to also go for the sound at 01:17:592 - I'm sincerely not very sure.
01:19:349 (79349|0,79484|0) - So did you drop the 2 jumps?
01:20:430 (80430|3,80565|1,80565|0) - Aah? So did you drop the 2 jumps?
01:21:511 (81511|0,81646|1,81646|2) - Oh, you dropped them.
01:23:808 (83808|1) - And then you dropped the jump altogether again.
01:24:889 (84889|3,84889|2) - I can see why - you chose to focus on the bell sound instead of the crash later on, but at the density you're going, you'll probably be fine if you keep them.
01:41:376 (101376|1) - Hmm. Is this in 2 for balance's sake? I believe you could do a 2-3-2 for that and keep the balance, but stay pitch relevant.
[Hard]
00:45:970 - Through this section your structure of doubles goes A B B A. Abstaining!
01:00:970 (60970|0) - Insert note?
01:10:024 (70024|2,70160|2) - The short LNs are unnecesary, I think.
02:43:380 - Hey, you go A B A B with the doubles here. Mmm.
[Challenge]
I'm starting to wonder if the hitsounds blend too well or if they're missing.
00:48:673 - Since you do a kick at 00:49:754 - you could put one here!
01:15:969 (75969|3,75969|2) - 3 for clap like you do two 1/2 beats later
[Extra]
00:20:024 (20024|1,20024|0) - 3?
01:37:862 (97862|0,97862|1) - 3?
01:40:024 (100024|1,100024|0) - 3?
02:05:518 - I'm wondering if the bass around this section is too subtle for most people.
The violent drop of any acknowledgement of it at the next section where you emphasize the hihats instead is a bit strange.
[Chordslayer]
This is the first chart I looked at before actually starting modding. The song appeared to change every time I listened to it.
Though, surprisingly looking at the chart made it easier to follow.
Haha, just leaving that anecdote for posterity.
00:00:565 (565|0,565|2) - 3, for sure.
00:07:862 (7862|0,7862|3,7930|3,7997|1,7997|2,8065|1,8133|0,8268|1,8268|2,8335|1,8403|3,8403|0) - The jacks are so violent for the introduction!
It does make me wonder what's coming up next if this is the intro.
00:09:214 (9214|0,9214|3) - 3.
00:11:376 (11376|3,11376|0) - 3. You're very consistent on using 2 though, so I have to wonder if this is a fault - seems like a design choice.
In that case, I have no idea if you did this by instinct or had a reason. In any case, it would be fine, but I'm still curious.
00:17:862 (17862|3,17862|2) - Same as before.
00:20:024 (20024|1,20024|0) - Yeap, definitely intentional.
I'd like if you did add the clap since it's fairly regular, and very stable, which helps a lot to understanding the song itself, I think!
00:30:835 - Oh. I guess not.
Holy damn, your structuring is so clean, lol.
01:02:727 - Didn't you drop this layer?
01:13:403 (73403|1,73403|0,73403|2,73470|1,73470|0) - hahaha this is so evil
01:22:524 (82524|0,82592|1,82592|3,82592|2,82660|0,82727|1,82727|2,82727|3,82795|0) - Can you shuffle these around a bit?
01:51:241 (111241|0,111241|1,111308|0,111308|1,111376|1,111376|0) - The volume is a bit low for this to be a jack, I believe.
And the previous phrase barely had any to close it this way.
02:14:479 - On second thought, the bass layer drop seems fine.
Whew. This is great, I swear. I was extremely sequential about the whole mod - so think of it more as impressions in sequence.
Have a star for good luck.
Reminder to downgrade your mp3, in case you haven't.
All of what follows is opinionated, following my own biases with respect to charting, and may not represent your original intentions.
With respect to consistency checks, Maxo is goddamn crazy, so all of the points I'll point out will be left to your own criteria.
With that said, I hope the observations (which are on the spot!) that follow have value to you. With that said, I do 1 through 4, left to right.
[Normal]
00:24:619 (24619|0,25024|0) - To follow the harmony chord going down, perhaps you want to do a 2-1 sequence instead of a 1-1.
00:17:727 - The chord at the background fills in at this point. A less observant player would probably confuse it with flowing into the 2-3-4 that comes afterwards. Perhaps add a note.
00:26:376 (26376|3) - Move to 1 to keep this ladder pattern consistent with the previous phrase, perhaps. I'm not too sure - but you might want it.
00:29:889 - There's a good reason not to include the 1 in here. Just noting that I noticed.
00:34:079 (34079|2,34079|3,34349|2,34349|3) - +clap sound?
00:34:619 (34619|1,34619|0) - +soft-whistle?
00:38:943 (38943|2,38943|1) - +finish sound? If so, possibly change the clap for a finish for consistency.
00:40:700 (40700|1,40970|1,41241|2,41511|2,41646|3) - I'd vouch for pitch relevancy, but this does follow the ladder theme.
00:43:673 (43673|0,43943|0,44214|0,44349|0,44619|0,44754|0,45024|0,45295|0) - But on the next phrase, you still use the 1-lane you used previously.
But then you do the ladder again, and start transitioning to the next phase of the song.
Welp, nevermind that.
01:15:970 (75970|3,76105|0) - You were using the 2 jumps to signify this, and I am not pointing out the point where you left out the jump because of this, but you drop it here. Given the focus the synth gets and that it'd mean you'd have to also go for the sound at 01:17:592 - I'm sincerely not very sure.
01:19:349 (79349|0,79484|0) - So did you drop the 2 jumps?
01:20:430 (80430|3,80565|1,80565|0) - Aah? So did you drop the 2 jumps?
01:21:511 (81511|0,81646|1,81646|2) - Oh, you dropped them.
01:23:808 (83808|1) - And then you dropped the jump altogether again.
01:24:889 (84889|3,84889|2) - I can see why - you chose to focus on the bell sound instead of the crash later on, but at the density you're going, you'll probably be fine if you keep them.
01:41:376 (101376|1) - Hmm. Is this in 2 for balance's sake? I believe you could do a 2-3-2 for that and keep the balance, but stay pitch relevant.
[Hard]
00:45:970 - Through this section your structure of doubles goes A B B A. Abstaining!
01:00:970 (60970|0) - Insert note?
01:10:024 (70024|2,70160|2) - The short LNs are unnecesary, I think.
02:43:380 - Hey, you go A B A B with the doubles here. Mmm.
[Challenge]
I'm starting to wonder if the hitsounds blend too well or if they're missing.
00:48:673 - Since you do a kick at 00:49:754 - you could put one here!
01:15:969 (75969|3,75969|2) - 3 for clap like you do two 1/2 beats later
[Extra]
00:20:024 (20024|1,20024|0) - 3?
01:37:862 (97862|0,97862|1) - 3?
01:40:024 (100024|1,100024|0) - 3?
02:05:518 - I'm wondering if the bass around this section is too subtle for most people.
The violent drop of any acknowledgement of it at the next section where you emphasize the hihats instead is a bit strange.
[Chordslayer]
This is the first chart I looked at before actually starting modding. The song appeared to change every time I listened to it.
Though, surprisingly looking at the chart made it easier to follow.
Haha, just leaving that anecdote for posterity.
00:00:565 (565|0,565|2) - 3, for sure.
00:07:862 (7862|0,7862|3,7930|3,7997|1,7997|2,8065|1,8133|0,8268|1,8268|2,8335|1,8403|3,8403|0) - The jacks are so violent for the introduction!
It does make me wonder what's coming up next if this is the intro.
00:09:214 (9214|0,9214|3) - 3.
00:11:376 (11376|3,11376|0) - 3. You're very consistent on using 2 though, so I have to wonder if this is a fault - seems like a design choice.
In that case, I have no idea if you did this by instinct or had a reason. In any case, it would be fine, but I'm still curious.
00:17:862 (17862|3,17862|2) - Same as before.
00:20:024 (20024|1,20024|0) - Yeap, definitely intentional.
I'd like if you did add the clap since it's fairly regular, and very stable, which helps a lot to understanding the song itself, I think!
00:30:835 - Oh. I guess not.
Holy damn, your structuring is so clean, lol.
01:02:727 - Didn't you drop this layer?
01:13:403 (73403|1,73403|0,73403|2,73470|1,73470|0) - hahaha this is so evil
01:22:524 (82524|0,82592|1,82592|3,82592|2,82660|0,82727|1,82727|2,82727|3,82795|0) - Can you shuffle these around a bit?
01:51:241 (111241|0,111241|1,111308|0,111308|1,111376|1,111376|0) - The volume is a bit low for this to be a jack, I believe.
And the previous phrase barely had any to close it this way.
02:14:479 - On second thought, the bass layer drop seems fine.
Whew. This is great, I swear. I was extremely sequential about the whole mod - so think of it more as impressions in sequence.
Have a star for good luck.