forum

SOUND HOLIC Vs. dj TAKA feat. YURiCa - TIEFSEE [Taiko]

posted
Total Posts
37
Topic Starter
ll-oscar
This beatmap was submitted using in-game submission on 2016年8月26日 at 18:07:49

Artist: SOUND HOLIC Vs. dj TAKA feat. YURiCa
Title: TIEFSEE
Source: SOUND VOLTEX III GRAVITY WARS
Tags: Taiko full extended version 斬-ZAN- Hanatan 花たん antonio vivaldi winter deep spectrum sea over the dark of heart
BPM: 165
Filesize: 9099kb
Play Time: 05:48
Difficulties Available:
  1. Inner Oni (5.5 stars, 2386 notes)
Download: SOUND HOLIC Vs. dj TAKA feat. YURiCa - TIEFSEE
Information: Scores/Beatmap Listing
---------------
SOUND HOLIC Vs. dj TAKA feat. YURiCa is really amazing *v*
For stream players \:D/
WoahE
?

[Oni]

  1. 00:11:564 (46) - d , low pitch
  2. 00:19:018 (77) - k , high pitch
  3. 00:53:837 (221) - k , sounds better
  4. 01:17:928 (354,355,356,357) - d k k d , sounds better
  5. 03:01:564 (1013,1014,1015,1016,1017) - kkkkd , sounds better
  6. 03:02:837 (1021) - k , high pitch
Topic Starter
ll-oscar

WoahE wrote:

?

[Oni]

[list]
[*]00:11:564 (46) - d , low pitch -accepted
[*]00:19:018 (77) - k , high pitch -accepted
[*]00:53:837 (221) - k , sounds better -accepted
[*]01:17:928 (354,355,356,357) - d k k d , sounds better -accepted
[*]03:01:564 (1013,1014,1015,1016,1017) - kkkkd , sounds better -rejeced
[*]03:02:837 (1021) - k , high pitch - rejected
/list]
Dino99
Hi~~ owo

<Inner Oni>

  1. Remove Letterbox
  2. OD6? ...5 is too easy for PRO player to get SS IMO xD
  3. 00:21:928 (88,89) - Ctrl+G (Swap) Becasue 00:22:291 (89) - sounds higher~
  4. 01:17:473 - Add a d here? I hear the Drum sound~
  5. 02:26:382 (774,775,776,777) - Change to dkdkk here? Sounds better for me
  6. 03:02:837 (1021) - k to follow the high vocal~
  7. 03:13:746 (1085) - Maybe delete this note?... It can emphasize this sound 03:13:928 (1086) -
  8. 04:49:473 - Add a k?
  9. 05:36:109 (2216,2217,2218) - Change to 1/6 (dddd)... Because I hear the 1/6~ lol
Nice map & Song!

加油啦~ :D
Topic Starter
ll-oscar

Dino99 wrote:

Hi~~ owo

<Inner Oni>

  1. Remove Letterbox -removed
  2. OD6? ...5 is too easy for PRO player to get SS IMO xD , may be OD5 is really too easy =w= so i change it into OD5.5, might adjust to higher OD later
  3. 00:21:928 (88,89) - Ctrl+G (Swap) Becasue 00:22:291 (89) - sounds higher~ -accept :3
  4. 01:17:473 - Add a d here? I hear the Drum sound~ -rejected :(
  5. 02:26:382 (774,775,776,777) - Change to dkdkk here? Sounds better for me -changed into dk kk
  6. 03:02:837 (1021) - k to follow the high vocal~ -accepted
  7. 03:13:746 (1085) - Maybe delete this note?... It can emphasize this sound 03:13:928 (1086) - -rejected, seems strange if deleted it XD
  8. 04:49:473 - Add a k? -rejected
  9. 05:36:109 (2216,2217,2218) - Change to 1/6 (dddd)... Because I hear the 1/6~ lol -too hard if use 1/6, so i rejected it. soory~ XD
    thx for you modding :33//
Nice map & Song!

加油啦~ :D
qoot8123
We are afraid to say, this map is not accepted by the TNA. And there is following reasons:

  1. Reason1 : there are a lot of pattern inconsistencies, weird mapping (looking at the part after the first kiai). 00:58:655 (242) - 01:03:018 (263,264,265,266,267,268,269,270,271,272) - which is weird mixing between vocals and drums because the vocals are just NOT prominent in this song.
  2. Reason2 : this map followed too much non-drum instrument that make the map not represent the song well, kiai time for example, you follow the vocal too much ,and i feel you missed some note like 01:43:291 - . And i feel this map lacks of flow,for example : 01:46:655 - ~01:52:473 - it is consistent but feel very stiff, it could be improved if you continue map on 01:49:564 - instead of having 1/1 break.
conclusion : map is not bad, but still needs more good mods to improve.

edit: fixed some sentences.
OnosakiHito
Hi. I wanted to give some more specific reasons about the map as well, so you can work a bit with the points I mention.

On the first look the map might look fine, but I think in general it doesn't show a real structure beside following the vocals. A lot of beats has been ignore e.g. in following parts:

  1. 00:45:382 (164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,172) - . Beat is more significant than the vocal, so it should be rather beat > vocal when mapping.
  2. 00:54:291 - This part up to 01:17:564 has an outlined 1/1 beat which doesn't have to be followed 100% since else patterns would become too similar, but there should be a clear tendensy to it.
  3. 01:17:564 - Starting from here, following vocal might be okay. But to me it is patternwise inconsistent since beside following the vocals, there is no real connection between the patterns. It is also a pity that the bass in the background has been absolutely ignored.
  4. 01:40:837 - Kiai has the same problem. It's a clear d k d k.... beat, yet, it has been ignored by mainly following the vocal.
  5. 01:41:200 (445,446) - Breaks like these do not represent anything and have no connection to anything which makes them be useless at this point.
Actually I would go on like that. There are some nice parts, but the song has such significant beats that you can't just ignore them, yet, you are mapping mainly to the vocals. If anything, a beat-vocal based mapping way would be more appropriate here and help having a better structure overall.

Good luck!
Topic Starter
ll-oscar
Surono
wheres pp diff with 7000sr. how pp??1/?!?!. nvm
Topic Starter
ll-oscar

Surono wrote:

wheres pp diff with 7000sr. how pp??1/?!?!. nvm
no rank no pp :o
Prophecy
blackmoonface
Yuzeyun
\:D/

[ll-baka]
00:19:018 (77) - You seem to follow pitch on that section, k would make the piano note stand out more than d. And also because it's pitch-inconsistent with 00:18:655 (75) - (which is lower).
01:46:291 - Really sounds like a missed note, I'd see dd here.
01:50:109 (522) - Change to kat to put accent on that syllable, cuz you see you're kind of pitch inconsistent here
01:52:473 (537) - D instead of K, you only have a soft cymbal going on at that exact note (excluding held syllable)
01:55:928 (558) - Change to d, you'll have better separation between the vocal mapping and the beat-based mapping.
02:03:018 (604,605,606) - Invert colors or use kkk, 02:03:018 (604,605) - is the continuation of the syllable at 02:02:837 (603) - .
02:26:837 - Add a note here (can be d or k), kk kkdk is a very weird pattern considering it goes straightforward by the end.
02:38:655 (880) -Put a kat to show there's a piano note at that point. It's slightly lower-pitched than 02:39:018 (883) - but is quite as prominent.
02:39:746 (886,887,888,889,890,891) - Here, the quintuplet does not really make a distinct separation between the syllables. Put that as two triplets, would play and feel better. If you do so, don't forget to put 02:39:928 (888) - as kat to be pitch-consistent with 02:40:291 (891) - ,
02:40:473 (892) - Put as don to separate even more clearly the beat and the vocal.
02:51:200 (964,965,966,967) - ddk d feels better and more natural to play than d ddk. If you apply, add a note at 02:51:837 - for rhythm consistency.
02:53:564 (980,981,982,983,984,985,986,987,988) - You get a lot of low-pitched notes on that section, this might make the trick.
02:56:109 (999) - As k, or add 02:56:291 - as d - depends on your objective. k will "close" the subsection better with kkd, while d will focus on the kicks.
02:57:200 (1005) - As d, to avoid breaking the focus on the vocal.
03:19:382 - Missing beat
03:16:109 (1137,1138,1139,1140,1141,1142) - kkd ddk will fit more the vocal kat-mapping.
03:20:109 (1166,1167) - 03:21:564 (1177,1178) - The pitch progression is the same, make them similar
The last timing sections have a very low volume (barely audible), increase volume to 50-60%.


The rest have similar problems, pitch consistency is not all that much present (my biggest complain) between parts.

You should get some more mods, then you can call me back (I'd go with 5 or 6 to be on a safe side).
Topic Starter
ll-oscar

_Gezo_ wrote:

\:D/ Want some PP? :O)

[ll-baka]
00:19:018 (77) - You seem to follow pitch on that section, k would make the piano note stand out more than d. And also because it's pitch-inconsistent with 00:18:655 (75) - (which is lower). From 00:18:655 (75) - to 00:19:018 (77) - , the pitch of the piano is from high to low. So, k d k may not be consided for me.
01:46:291 - Really sounds like a missed note, I'd see dd here. For the part, i would like to show a consistent structure by following the vocal (01:46:473 (497,498,499,500,501,502,503,504,505,506) - , 01:47:928 (507,508,509,510,511,512,513,514,515,516) - ). Although there is a strong drum beat at 01:46:291 - , i perfer to follow the vocal. Sorry :o
01:50:109 (522) - Change to kat to put accent on that syllable, cuz you see you're kind of pitch inconsistent here Two notes are changed into k at 01:49:928 (521,522) -
01:52:473 (537) - D instead of K, you only have a soft cymbal going on at that exact note (excluding held syllable) If you heard carefully with 25%, you can hear a high pitch drum sound here. Thus, K is used.
01:55:928 (558) - Change to d, you'll have better separation between the vocal mapping and the beat-based mapping. Nice. Changed
02:03:018 (604,605,606) - Invert colors or use kkk, 02:03:018 (604,605) - is the continuation of the syllable at 02:02:837 (603) - . Accepted
02:26:837 - Add a note here (can be d or k), kk kkdk is a very weird pattern considering it goes straightforward by the end. Changed into kkdkddk
02:38:655 (880) -Put a kat to show there's a piano note at that point. It's slightly lower-pitched than 02:39:018 (883) - but is quite as prominent. changed into kkddk
02:39:746 (886,887,888,889,890,891) - Here, the quintuplet does not really make a distinct separation between the syllables. Put that as two triplets, would play and feel better. If you do so, don't forget to put 02:39:928 (888) - as kat to be pitch-consistent with 02:40:291 (891) - kkkkd is following the vocal. If break it into two triplets, it is a little bit strange for me. Also, it keeps the consistent structure in this part with 02:42:291 (903,904,905,906,907,908,909,910,911) - , 02:45:200 (922,923,924,925,926,927,928,929,930) - and 02:48:109 (942,943,944,945,946,947,948,949) -
02:40:473 (892) - Put as don to separate even more clearly the beat and the vocal. Two notes are same pitch by following the vocal at 02:40:291 (892,893) -
02:51:200 (964,965,966,967) - ddk d feels better and more natural to play than d ddk. If you apply, add a note at 02:51:837 - for rhythm consistency. d ddk has a better feel for me. :3
02:53:564 (980,981,982,983,984,985,986,987,988) - You get a lot of low-pitched notes on that section, this might make the trick. 02:53:564 (981,982,983) - is high pitch x_X
02:56:109 (999) - As k, or add 02:56:291 - as d - depends on your objective. k will "close" the subsection better with kkd, while d will focus on the kicks. 02:55:928 (999,1000) - kkd k sure can ''close" the subsection better with kkd d. However, it is one pair of two low pitch notes (02:55:928 (999,1000) - ) and i think this is more important.
02:57:200 (1005) - As d, to avoid breaking the focus on the vocal. Changed into kdk d
03:19:382 - Missing beat Same reason as 01:46:291 -
03:16:109 (1137,1138,1139,1140,1141,1142) - kkd ddk will fit more the vocal kat-mapping. Used kkk ddk
03:20:109 (1166,1167) - 03:21:564 (1177,1178) - The pitch progression is the same, make them similar Umm... I can hear the pitch of 03:19:746 (1163,1164,1165,1166,1167) - , 03:21:200 (1174,1175,1176,1177,1178) - and 03:22:655 (1185,1186,1187,1188,1189) - are not really same
for, The last timing sections have a very low volume (barely audible), increase volume to 50-60%. Changed into 50%. i dont want to make the hit sound too loud since the piano sound in this part is very soft.


The rest have similar problems, pitch consistency is not all that much present (my biggest complain) between parts.

You should get some more mods, then you can call me back (I'd go with 5 or 6 to be on a safe side). I will find more mods since this song is really hard to map and i know i need more suggestions from the other mappers.

Thanks for _Baka_ 's nice modding :3
Topic Starter
ll-oscar
Hi _Gezo_ ( _Baka_ ),

i am going to explain for you how i map for the kiai.

Structure: Actually three parts of kiai are base on one structure and i used mainly vocal mapping style.

For 1st Vocal Kiai,

1. 01:40:837 (462) -
It is the start of kiai. Strong beat is used by following the drum beat.

2. 01:41:018 - and 01:41:200 (463) -
Here has vocal. However, it is really uncomfortable if notes are put in this way https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5282325 . So, i sub the note with 01:41:200 (463,464,465) - .

3. 01:42:109 (467) - to 01:46:109 (496) -
This part is fully following the vocal. (But i know there may still some problems with using k and d, so i need some mods to fix the it)

4. 01:46:291 -
You may ask why i didnt put a note here although there is drum beat. I can say that i have try many patterns such as https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5282297 ). Totally following vocal and stop 01:45:928 (495,496) - here with K D is more comfortable to me.

5. 01:46:473 (497) - to 01:50:109 (522) -
Actually, here is separated into three part. 01:46:473 (497) - to 01:47:746 (506) - and 01:47:928 (507) - to 01:49:200 (516) - and the remaining part.
The pattern are same -> o ooo o o ooo o
The only difference are the high and low pitch. I am following the pitch of vocal and put the notes.

6. 01:51:018 (526) - to 01:52:473 (537) -
Following the vocal too...

7. 01:52:473 (537) -
Exactly same as 01:40:837 (462) - and all the structure from 01:40:837 (462) - are restarted.
For example:
01:52:837 (538) - same as 01:41:018 -
01:53:746 (542) - same as 01:42:109 (467) - ( The reason for why i didn't use https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/5282405 i because it is strange to used the same pattern as 01:42:109 (467) - due to different vocal)
01:58:109 (572) - same as 01:46:473 (497) -
02:02:109 (598) - same as 01:50:473 (523) -

For 3rd Vocal Kiai, ( why 3rd?? Because it is same as the 1st vocal kiai and different with the 2nd kiai and i would like to talk this first)

1. You can see that all of the 1/2 is exactly the same as the 1st vocal kiai because the only different between two part is the beat power (3rd > 1st). Therefore, the pattern used is relative higher density.

2. 04:50:291 (1849) - to 04:50:837 (1853) -
Base on same pattern with 01:41:200 (463,464,465) -. Reason for higher density pattern, i connect the part of 04:50:291 (1849,1850,1851,1852,1853) - and 04:51:018 (1854,1855,1856,1857,1858,1859,1860,1861,1862,1863,1864,1865,1866,1867,1868,1869,1870,1871,1872,1873,1874,1875,1876,1877,1878,1879,1880,1881,1882,1883,1884,1885,1886) -

3. 04:55:382 -
same as 01:46:291 -

4. 04:55:564 (1887) - to 04:59:200 (1917) -
same as 01:46:473 (497,498,499,500,501,502,503,504,505,506,507,508,509,510,511,512,513,514,515,516,517,518,519,520,521,522) -
The only different is the length of the notes (Due to need higher density). 3 changed into 5 ( 01:46:655 (498,499,500,501) - -> 04:55:746 (1888,1889,1890,1891,1892) - and 01:47:382 (503,504,505,506) - -> 04:56:473 (1894,1895,1896,1897,1898) - , etc)

5. 04:59:382 (1918) -
It is added to connect two parts
Part A : 04:55:564 (1887) - to 04:59:200 (1917) -
Part B : 04:59:382 (1918) - to 05:01:564 (1936) -
No big problem is caused for just connecting two parts.

6. 05:01:564 (1936) -
repeat the part and same structure from 04:49:928 (1848) - to 05:01:564 (1936) - .
For example,
04:50:291 (1849) - to 04:55:200 (1886) - same as 05:01:928 (1937) - to 05:06:837 (1974) -
05:07:200 (1975) - to 05:13:200 (2024) - same as 04:55:564 (1887) - to 05:01:564 (1936) -

Back to 2nd Vocal Kiai,
I think the structure are 90% same but the vocal and pitch are very different. So i map this part independently and you may feel very different to the 1st and 3rd Vocal Kiai part. If you check very carefully, you found that they are very similar.

1. 03:13:928 (1124) -
Also strong beat for presenting the start of kiai

2. 03:14:291 (1125) - to 03:14:837 (1129) -
You can see it is different with 01:41:200 (463,464,465) -
However, it is same as 04:50:291 (1849,1850,1851,1852,1853) -

3. 03:15:200 (1131) - to 03:19:200 (1161) -
same as 01:42:109 (467) - and 04:51:200 (1855) - right??

4. 03:19:564 (1162) - to 03:23:200 (1190) -
same as 01:46:473 (497) - to 01:50:109 (522) - and also base on one pattern ( o ooo o o ooo o), but there is some different. ( o ooo o o ooo o changed into o ooooo o ooo o for increasing the notes density)

5. 03:23:564 (1191) - to 03:25:564 (1206) -
same as 01:50:473 (523) - to 01:52:473 (537) -

6. 03:25:564 (1206) - to 03:37:200 (1291) -
repeating again o.O ( same as 03:13:928 (1124) - to 03:25:564 (1206) - )

This message is going to explain how my notes structure work in these three vocal kiai.
If you have any question and want more explain for the other parts, just tell me and i will reply you as soon as possible. Thanks a lot. :)
Nardoxyribonucleic
Hi, here is the M4M as requested.

[General]

Disable countdown and widescreen support as they have no effect towards the map.

  • [Inner Oni]
  1. 00:03:564 (9) - consider changing this note to k for the relatively high-pitched music ?
  2. 00:19:018 (77) - same as ^
  3. 00:26:109 (110,111) - swapping these notes to k d would fit the pitch decrease well.
  4. 00:49:564 (195) - maybe d here for a smoother flow ?
  5. 00:58:109 (252) - you may remove this note as it sounds a bit redundant.
  6. 01:01:382 (270,271) - swapping these notes to d k would sound better as the pitch of vocal at 01:01:382 (270) - is lower than that at 01:01:018 (268) -
  7. 01:12:291 (335) - k would fit the relatively high-pitched vocal well.
  8. 01:13:018 (340,341) - swapping these notes to d k would be better if you apply ^
  9. 01:17:928 (372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381) - try d k k d k k d d k d ? This could accompany the vocal in a way better.
  10. 01:20:837 (383,384) - swapping these notes to d k would follow the pitch increase nicely.
  11. 01:24:291 (394,395,396,397,398,399,400,401) - similar to 01:17:928 (372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381) - , d k k d k k k d would work.
  12. 01:37:382 (447,448) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) -
  13. 01:45:928 (498,499) - K D would be much better owing to the pitch drop across the two notes.
  14. 01:50:473 (526,528) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) -
  15. 01:53:382 (545) - change to k and add d at 01:53:837 - to improve the overall flow ? Currently the pattern contains too many dons in succession, which do not represent the music well.
  16. 01:54:746 (555) - move this note to 01:54:928 - and change to k if you apply ^ . Then you may change 01:56:109 (565,566,567,568,569) - to ddddk for variation.
  17. 02:09:837 - consider adding k here for the noticeable beat ?
  18. 02:21:473 - same as ^
  19. 02:40:473 (901) - d would be better as there is no high-pitched sound to map with.
  20. 02:45:382 (931) - same as 01:12:291 (335) -
  21. 02:51:200 (972,973,974,975) - maybe try ddk d instead of d ddk to match the vocal there ?
  22. 02:53:018 (986) - same as 00:49:564 (195) -
  23. 02:52:655 (983,984,985,986) - I think kkd d would result in a smoother flow instead of k ddk since there is nothing important at 02:52:928 -
  24. 02:53:564 (988,989,990) - ddd ? The vocal pitch here is relatively low.
  25. From 02:53:564 to 02:56:109 - the pattern could be reformed like this to express the vocal more appropriately: (cursor at 02:54:837 - )
  26. 02:56:928 (1011) - similar to ^ , you may move this note to 02:56:746 - and move 02:57:655 (1016) - to 02:57:473 -
  27. 03:03:200 (1056,1057) and 03:04:655 (1065,1066) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) -
  28. 03:14:291 (1132) - maybe d as you did at 03:25:928 (1215) - for pattern consistency ?
  29. 03:19:018 (1167,1168) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) -
  30. 03:41:291 (1343,1345) - consider swapping these notes to d k to accompany the pitch increase of the music ?
  31. 04:06:200 (1561,1562) - swapping these notes to kd would fit the pitch drop well.
  32. 04:22:655 (1730,1731,1732,1733,1734,1735,1736,1737,1738,1739) - same as 01:17:928 (372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381) -
  33. 04:25:564 (1741,1742) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) -
  34. 04:29:018 (1752,1753,1754,1755,1756,1757,1758,1759) - same as 01:24:291 (394,395,396,397,398,399,400,401) -
  35. 04:45:018 (1817,1818) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) -
  36. 04:55:018 (1894,1895) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) -
  37. 04:59:928 (1931) - k would sound better as vocal pitch is higher than 04:59:746 (1930,1932) -
  38. 05:18:473 (2088,2089,2090,2091,2092,2093,2094) - maybe dkkddkd as you did at 04:04:291 (1541,1542,1543,1544,1545,1546,1547) - ?
You may call me back after that~ :D
Topic Starter
ll-oscar

Nardoxyribonucleic wrote:

Hi, here is the M4M as requested.

[General]

Disable countdown and widescreen support as they have no effect towards the map.

  • [Inner Oni]
  1. 00:03:564 (9) - consider changing this note to k for the relatively high-pitched music ? Sounds better
  2. 00:19:018 (77) - same as ^ I think k d d is better for me :3
  3. 00:26:109 (110,111) - swapping these notes to k d would fit the pitch decrease well. 00:26:109 (110) - sounds low pitch than 00:26:473 (111) -
  4. 00:49:564 (195) - maybe d here for a smoother flow ? Sure :)
  5. 00:58:109 (252) - you may remove this note as it sounds a bit redundant. How about add d here 00:58:200 - ?
  6. 01:01:382 (270,271) - swapping these notes to d k would sound better as the pitch of vocal at 01:01:382 (270) - is lower than that at 01:01:018 (268) - d k d k d k d sounds strange to me lol
  7. 01:12:291 (335) - k would fit the relatively high-pitched vocal well. Good \:D/
  8. 01:13:018 (340,341) - swapping these notes to d k would be better if you apply ^ I like k d more. Sorry
  9. 01:17:928 (372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381) - try d k k d k k d d k d ? This could accompany the vocal in a way better. k k k d k k d d k d sounds better for me
  10. 01:20:837 (383,384) - swapping these notes to d k would follow the pitch increase nicely. Accepted
  11. 01:24:291 (394,395,396,397,398,399,400,401) - similar to 01:17:928 (372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381) - , d k k d k k k d would work. k d k d d k k d sounds better for me
  12. 01:37:382 (447,448) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) - 01:37:382 (448) - seems have a higher pitch
  13. 01:45:928 (498,499) - K D would be much better owing to the pitch drop across the two notes. 呢度我都諗左好耐 因為英文未必表達到所以用翻中文打。 呢度聽出黎既pitch的確係由高去低(因此理論上用K D會比較match) 不過唔知點解用翻打果時既logic感覺相反色係呢度用會更能表達個反差感 同埋配上個手勢既話我感覺都係D K舒服過K D 所以目前我應該會保持住用D K 日後再作考慮 :3
  14. 01:50:473 (526,528) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) - Accepted
  15. 01:53:382 (545) - change to k and add d at 01:53:837 - to improve the overall flow ? Currently the pattern contains too many dons in succession, which do not represent the music well. 01:53:837 (549) - added d
  16. 01:54:746 (555) - move this note to 01:54:928 - and change to k if you apply ^ . Then you may change 01:56:109 (565,566,567,568,569) - to ddddk for variation. Umm.... It is a little bit strange for me if apply those changes. Sorry :O
  17. 02:09:837 - consider adding k here for the noticeable beat ? 02:09:837 - is it relative softer than the sound in 02:09:928 (664,665,666,667,668) - . Therefore, it may not be considered.
  18. 02:21:473 - same as ^ same as ^ XD
  19. 02:40:473 (901) - d would be better as there is no high-pitched sound to map with. 02:40:291 (899,900) - this two notes are same pitch and it may break the feel if use k d
  20. 02:45:382 (931) - same as 01:12:291 (335) - Accepted
  21. 02:51:200 (972,973,974,975) - maybe try ddk d instead of d ddk to match the vocal there ? 02:51:382 (972,973,974) - changed into dkd k
  22. 02:53:018 (986) - same as 00:49:564 (195) - 02:52:837 (983,984,985,986) - i can hear d k k (1/2) here
  23. 02:52:655 (983,984,985,986) - I think kkd d would result in a smoother flow instead of k ddk since there is nothing important at 02:52:928 - 呢度聽落有少少怪 我再諗下改唔改住
  24. 02:53:564 (988,989,990) - ddd ? The vocal pitch here is relatively low. I used ddd before and i decided to change it into kkk since i feel better with this.
  25. From 02:53:564 to 02:56:109 - the pattern could be reformed like this to express the vocal more appropriately: (cursor at 02:54:837 - ) I made some changes here. You may have a re-look and give some advices :3
  26. 02:56:928 (1011) - similar to ^ , you may move this note to 02:56:746 - and move 02:57:655 (1016) - to 02:57:473 - I made some changes here too. You may have a re-look and give some advices :3
  27. 03:03:200 (1056,1057) and 03:04:655 (1065,1066) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) - too (中文字果段解釋)www
  28. 03:14:291 (1132) - maybe d as you did at 03:25:928 (1215) - for pattern consistency ? Accepted
  29. 03:19:018 (1167,1168) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) -
  30. 03:41:291 (1343,1345) - consider swapping these notes to d k to accompany the pitch increase of the music ? 呢度應該都要用翻中文。魚蛋方面,因為我個人比較會迎合玩家手勢去map圖多過100%跟足曬music,所以我會prefer用翻kd)
  31. 04:06:200 (1561,1562) - swapping these notes to kd would fit the pitch drop well. dk sounds smooth for me
  32. 04:22:655 (1730,1731,1732,1733,1734,1735,1736,1737,1738,1739) - same as 01:17:928 (372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381) - Rejected :(
  33. 04:25:564 (1741,1742) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) - changed :)
  34. 04:29:018 (1752,1753,1754,1755,1756,1757,1758,1759) - same as 01:24:291 (394,395,396,397,398,399,400,401) - 04:29:018 (1751) - changed into k too
  35. 04:45:018 (1817,1818) - same as 01:20:837 (383,384) - i can hear k d here x_x
  36. 04:55:018 (1894,1895) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) - same as 01:45:928 (498,499) -
  37. 04:59:928 (1931) - k would sound better as vocal pitch is higher than 04:59:746 (1930,1932) - Accepted
  38. 05:18:473 (2088,2089,2090,2091,2092,2093,2094) - maybe dkkddkd as you did at 04:04:291 (1541,1542,1543,1544,1545,1546,1547) - ? I prefer to follow the vocal here.
You may call me back after that~ :D

I like your mods. Thanks so much Nardo :))) 8-)
Nardoxyribonucleic
A quick recheck here. (no kd)

[General]


  • [Inner Oni]
  1. 00:17:928 (72,74,75,77) - If you listen to the pitch of these notes, you will find that 00:17:928 (72,74,77) - have the same pitch. Therefore, it would be even better to swap 00:18:655 (75,77) - to d k to match the piano.
  2. 00:26:109 (110,111) - The vocal pitch of the first note is in fact higher than the second note, so I would recommend changing these notes to k d. Furthermore, the piano at 00:26:655 (112) - could be emphasized more in this way.
  3. 01:17:928 (373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381,382) - How about rearranging the pattern into d d k d k k d k k d ? I would say d at 01:17:928 (373) - would sound better owing to the high-pitched vocal at 01:17:564 -
  4. 01:37:382 (448,449,450,451) - d k d K would express the vocal nicely since the pitch is increasing across 01:37:382 (448,449,450) -
  5. 02:40:291 (899,900) - I would still recommend changing this note to d as vocal only appears at 02:40:291 - . More importantly, this could help emphasize the high-pitched notes at 02:40:837 (901,902,903,904) - which are all mapped as k.
  6. From 02:51:018 to 02:53:200 - It seems that the flow of the new pattern is not good enough. Maybe try this pattern instead to follow the high-pitched vocal accordingly ? (cursor at 02:52:109 - )
  7. 04:22:655 (1729,1730,1731,1732,1733,1734,1735,1736,1737,1738) - same as 01:17:928 (373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381,382) -
  8. 04:45:018 (1816,1817) - d k would work well since the pitch is increasing across the two notes. In fact, 04:45:018 (1816,1818) - have the same lower pitch, but you can keep 04:45:382 (1818) - as k because of the next D.
Topic Starter
ll-oscar

Nardoxyribonucleic wrote:

A quick recheck here. (no kd)

[General]

唔記得改 sorry :O)
  • [Inner Oni]
  1. 00:17:928 (72,74,75,77) - If you listen to the pitch of these notes, you will find that 00:17:928 (72,74,77) - have the same pitch. Therefore, it would be even better to swap 00:18:655 (75,77) - to d k to match the piano. Changed into d d k
  2. 00:26:109 (110,111) - The vocal pitch of the first note is in fact higher than the second note, so I would recommend changing these notes to k d. Furthermore, the piano at 00:26:655 (112) - could be emphasized more in this way. 00:26:109 (110) - I really want put a d note here. But as you say, the vocal pitch of the first note is in fact higher than the second note. Therefore i would change 00:26:473 (111) - into d too.
  3. 01:17:928 (373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381,382) - How about rearranging the pattern into d d k d k k d k k d ? I would say d at 01:17:928 (373) - would sound better owing to the high-pitched vocal at 01:17:564 - Changed into d d k d k k d d k d , 01:19:200 (380) - sounds put d is better for me
  4. 01:37:382 (448,449,450,451) - d k d K would express the vocal nicely since the pitch is increasing across 01:37:382 (448,449,450) - 聽多次又好似唔錯:D accepted
  5. 02:40:291 (899,900) - I would still recommend changing this note to d as vocal only appears at 02:40:291 - . More importantly, this could help emphasize the high-pitched notes at 02:40:837 (901,902,903,904) - which are all mapped as k. How about kkddd d from 02:39:928 (895) - ?
  6. From 02:51:018 to 02:53:200 - It seems that the flow of the new pattern is not good enough. Maybe try this pattern instead to follow the high-pitched vocal accordingly ? (cursor at 02:52:109 - ) Made some changes
  7. 04:22:655 (1729,1730,1731,1732,1733,1734,1735,1736,1737,1738) - same as 01:17:928 (373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381,382) - accepted
  8. 04:45:018 (1816,1817) - d k would work well since the pitch is increasing across the two notes. In fact, 04:45:018 (1816,1818) - have the same lower pitch, but you can keep 04:45:382 (1818) - as k because of the next D. I would keep this two notes as k d since i really think k d is better. (呢度我聽左好耐下都係覺得04:45:018 (1816) - 同04:45:382 (1818) - 都係high pitch lol. 不過轉左04:44:837 (1815) - 做d. 你睇下會唔會感覺好少少


Some Addition!!
1. 01:15:655 (358) - d->k
2. 02:40:655 (901) - added d
3. 02:43:564 (920) - added d
4. 01:12:018 (334) - to 01:17:564 (373) - 改左少少連打位
5. 02:45:109 (931) - to 02:50:655 (973) - same as^
6. 01:50:109 (526) - seems relative low pitch than 01:49:928 (525) - . Thus, k->d
7. 04:59:200 (1928) - same as^
Nardoxyribonucleic
The map is now much better than before. Stream arrangement and SV changes look reasonable to me.

Metadata reference: http://www.konamistyle.jp/item/72991

Bubble #1~
iloveyou4ever
點解仲未rank...
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply