Vulkin wrote:
m4m 4 shinbatsu dad
on request not modding futsuu, nor muzukashii
-Kantan-
there are alot of inherited points that do absolutely nothing, delete them
is volume 100% ok?
00:00:185 - why not start from here like the other diffs? for same drain time I actually forgot to map the beginning lol oops
00:21:730 (22,23) - ctrl+g so its dk and the k can have consistency with 00:17:639 (15) -
00:30:730 - why not k dkd k d? so it has consistency with previous patterns
00:50:094 (9) - move to 00:49:548 - so the triplets can be separated? plus it would give the chance to make 00:50:366 (10) - finisher I think this is fine as is, this suggestion makes it sound kind of awkward imo.
00:58:821 (25) - ^ ^
01:09:730 (46,1) - delete so theres break consistent with 01:05:639 - ? then you could add a note at 01:11:639 - (preferably k) for the change of pitch of that instrument (piano?) I deleted that note, but I didn't add a note for the sake of maintaining sufficient 4/1 breaks.
01:31:548 - add a k? so it has consistency with 01:40:275 (36) -
01:50:912 (53) - k? same pitch as 01:50:639 (52) - This note kinda caters more to the vocal as that's the most prominent sound at this point in the song.
-Oni-
00:06:730 (1,2,3,4) - why not D on these?, same sound as 00:04:139 (33,34) -
00:25:821 (112) - I dont think this sound is strong for a finisher
00:34:685 - add a d? sounds better imo Keeping it as is unless someone else says the same thing.
00:37:275 (178,179,180,181) - kdkd? reflects the pitch better imo ^
00:39:457 (186) - i dont think this is strong sound for finisher
01:11:639 (386) - ^
01:48:185 - why no note? There's not much of any sound here.
01:50:912 (37) - same pitch as previous note, make it k See muzu.
-Inner Oni-
00:06:730 (27,28,29,30) - same pitch as 00:04:139 (1) -
00:17:366 (79) - i dont think its strong sound owo
00:17:639 (80) - finisher? same sound as 00:22:003 (120) - so why not?
00:48:185 - in this part i think theres some triplets missing, feels a bit dull I disagree, what's mapped rn is what is clearly matchable to the instrument.
00:56:912 - ^ ^
00:59:094 (388) - finisher? 00:54:730 (348) - this has finisher, and its same sound, so why not? Nah, I don't think that note needs the extra emphasis. The note on 00:54:730 has a finisher because it's the beginning of a kiai.
01:07:821 (458) - finisher? 01:03:457 (425) - same sound
01:16:548 (518) - finisher & D? 01:12:185 (485) - same sound, while youre at it, make 01:16:821 (519) - k so it has better consistency
01:27:457 - feels a bit dull & empty here Same response as before.
01:36:185 (106,107,108,109,110,111,112) - i would make them finisher, the sound seems fitting for them I think that creates too many finishers.
01:50:912 (194) - k? same sound as previous note (01:50:639 (193) - ) See muzu.
From Ayyri via Discord
00:06:730 - I don't really see a need for this, considering that the sound continues here, providing no natural breaks in the build up. Whereas at 00:07:685 - / 00:07:821 - there is a break in the sound here.
00:17:366 - A rather energetic vocal sample on it's own before the start of the main rhythm? I think a finisher is quite fitting for this.
00:20:155 - / 00:24:525 - / 01:14:707 - Fair point. I was moreso going for a different pace for the vocal samples here, hence the use of the double beforehand. But I will consider using these suggestions, to fit more with the surrounding patterns, even if it deviates from the original idea.
00:34:821 - Airhorn doesn't really warrant a finisher here. Because it would take away emphasis from the upcoming calm part at, 00:35:094 - .
00:35:366 - If I were to remove this note, I would have to remove 00:35:639 - / 00:36:457 - / 00:37:003 - / 00:37:548 - / 00:37:821 -, as well. Because they are all following the clockticking sound in the background.
00:52:548 - / 01:01:275 - Valid point. But I think having 00:52:548 - and 00:52:957 - as the same colour would better emphasis the higher pitch at 00:53:230 - , rather than take away from it by making it a back and forth pattern.
01:22:003 - Unlike previous times, this part is not following the most apparent rhythm in the song. It is following the more subtle vocal same in the background. Making them all the same colour makes it a bit more obvious that it is following one concrete thing, rather than just ignoring it. Because this sample was not used before now. Moreover, it gives a decent pick up into the next section, which is faster paced.
01:50:912 - Disagree. Rather, it sounds like the vocal is going down, and fading out. Which it very well is. So I believe that going from a high pitched k, to a low pitched d illustrates this quite well.
I hope it helps ^^
I'll mod your map soon @_@