카앜 퉤
01:37:743 - It has not big 1/4 sound as 01:40:337 - 01:42:932 - , so I didn't.shionelove wrote:
from 01:37:743 you should follow 1/4 sounds.As DP player it feels bad you don'k make this part so much easier because this is remix of DIRGE.
and highest diff,01:00:071 (60071|5,60182|5,60293|5) - 01:07:960 (67960|1,67960|0,67960|2,68071|2,68071|1,68071|0,68182|2,68182|1,68182|0) - 02:19:422 (139422|1,139422|2,139532|1,139532|2,139642|1,139642|2) - they ignore the song,compering with Black Another which is correct rhythm.
It's too quiet sound, not like 02:30:032 - 02:34:518 - 02:43:490 - so I didn't add itRivals_7 wrote:
02:39:004 - arent you missing a piano sound here?
just saying because it looks a tiny bit inconsistent with what you did before - 02:34:518 (154518|2) -
your top diff and Another btw
Thanks for your concern, I understand what you said. Yeah it seems very difficult and non-FCable pattern, but I already tested this structure with many people and they FCed it properly. I didn't just randomly place the notes, but thinking and trying many different structures what is good for it. And it's my result. About the SV, it's for feeling like we are really playing the piano, it's concerto. I want to catch the movement of pianist's hand, so jump is good for it to express that feeling. I hope you understand my opinion too :3Kamikaze wrote:
Looking at the top difficulty the SVs are very forced, most of them are just made to fill the gaps which is not okay, especially SVs in places like 00:34:035 - where sure, you have a pause followed by a loud chord - but is making a scroll jump here a good way of expressing it? I really don't think so.
the slowdowns and smooth transitions out of them are good, but the SV jumps here in most spots feel really unnecessary and just placed there so players will trip up on them and not because of the song's sounds. I wanted to emphasize the feeling, like we are really playing the piano. The insane pianist, piano is playing him or her actually, express the feeling with visual performance. I wanted to catch that movement so added the jump. It's not tough SV (just 0.5x 1.5x) so no problem tho
also the chord density doesn't seem consistent and justified, for example 01:02:071 (62071|2,62071|3,62182|3,62182|2) - those chords feel the same as 01:01:738 (61738|3,61738|4,61738|1,61849|3,61849|4,61849|1) - just on a diffrent pitch, but they differ, also the ending is suddenly 4-chords then random amount of notes + a 1/4 stream that supports something that's not exactly hearable? actually it's a different pitch, and you can hear another piano sound like 01:01:960 - 01:02:293 - . it is only placed at this part like 01:00:738 - or 01:00:849 - , not 01:02:071 - or 01:02:182 - . And more,
I added the hitsound for this, it means it's more highlight part.
There's also an issue of you sometimes completely ignoring pitch which creates pretty funny results, the best example of this would be 01:07:960 - where you straight up ignore all pitch relevancy for the sake of keeping hand ballance, the ending also tries to do that but the 1/4 mixed in between ruins it not just ignoring pitch, I arranged it with PR and hand balance both, so it's the result. I only focused on the difference, high or low pitch.
After pitch is changed, I put the notes left and right, right and left. it can express the changing of pitch enough tho
I've also heard people complain about the ending being straight up not good to play, but I will wait for someone to suggest patterns since those people would be probably better suited for it than I am, however if you would just delete those notes it would flow way nicer due to not having the implied minijacks with stair transitions:
(the last one is just a flow breaker at the end and I personally think that the ending is also overchorded)
I'll poke people if they have any suggestions for the ending, for now those are my points.
tl;dr SVs in my opinion are unnecessary and made only so there's SVs which is bad and people have problems with patterning of chordjacks, especially density and the ending For consistency, 02:14:148 - 02:22:060 - this part uses 5 notes for piano + finish drum, the piano chord with drum sound.
the chordjack is intended, you can check it like 01:00:182 (60182|5,60293|5) - , I already use this patterning structure when I want to express this flow.
Yeah it's pretty hard structure. But I don't think it ruins the entire structure, it has consistency and the reason it should be placed as itself. And I think it's the best structure with that density and consistency, so want to keep it
there are also the bursts at 2,1k combo where EVERYONE that submitted a score has missed, I think something has to be wrong if you have a 3 miss score on that hard of a chart and it has two or three misses in the same part as everyone else, kind of a in2k6 problem although admittedly way better lol I already have many test about it, people said it's FCable and really they did it. The scores at qualified section are just their first playing or not their full condition cause it's not ranked map yet and only 4 days ago so it can't be used for statistics tho :3
about snapping, it's for simplicity so I use 1/8 the whole part. Thanks for your concern too :3sankansuki wrote:
The snapping ones i'm not too confident on, but the timing/offset ones has to be changed.
This is a mod for Concerto Cruento diff (timing/offset is probably for the mapset)
00:19:797 - idk how accurate it must snap according the the sounds but this snapping is what i hear. Though you can only have this snapping if you change the bpm to 130 just to put the notes and then switch back to 65. I can understand if you say that you can only hear it in 25%, but its just something i can see. I followed the original bpm, it's 65. For the playability and simplicity, 1/16 snap is better option to express this part.
00:23:657 - the red timing point here is a little too early, i feel like it's offset should be around 23669. If you ask me, 12ms is quite a bit.
and at 00:34:047 - (using 23669) sounds like this (using 1/16 & 1/12) For SV, I just place them at same timing point. About timing point, for the delay of some piano sound I use current point.
01:28:123 (88123|6,88123|5) - sounds more like it should be at 01:28:110 - 1/6 snapping
this, explained below (01:29:120 - 1/12)
and this (01:35:503 - 1/12) some are still 1/8 though
same thing with above, for the delay of piano sound and simplicity. I simply placed it at 1/8
For this section 01:32:950 - i feel like the two notes representing the piano should be on 1/12 snapping instead of 1/8, because the piano sounds earlier.
And if you were going to map the piano like that, why not put another two notes 01:33:455 - since there's a piano sound there. But before you say that it's to match the same section at 01:34:227 - there is a slight difference where the piano sound at 01:34:705 - is different from the pattern of the sound, if that makes sense. It's very quiet sound when playing 100%, so I didn't add it.
these red timing points (and green) should be changed. mostly around 9ms or more differences
01:37:743 - 97743>97756 I put them bpm point when the bar ends. I follow the 185bpm stair and just add new bar for it, seems little bit delayed but it's not big gap tho
01:46:825 - 106825>106837 no problem tho?
02:01:309 - 121309>121316 when I hear 02:04:967 - , it seems matched well.
02:07:162 - 127162>127169 same with above, 02:08:573 - seems well.
02:09:986 - 129986>129992 02:13:801 - , well matched.
02:14:148 - 134148>134157 02:14:807 - , no problem.
some part looks little bit delayed but when I checked the whole part, it matches well.
the only sv i have issues with is 01:15:721 - the svs here are just too exaggerated just 0.5x 1.5x jump, same with 00:34:035 - this jump.
thank you for your suggestion, but I still want to keep my structure as I said above. About 1/4 snap, it actually have a sound tho. Not too big sound, but it has._underjoy wrote:
I suggest this - changing 5-chords to 4-chords should make it more bearable to play.
On the other hand - I hear this 1/4 stream as ghost notes.