1. ONI (4,41 stars, 1932 notes)

Skylish wrote:

Random general mod here

[General]

> 00:20:000 - 'Omit first bar line' should be checked since it is an intro of main phrase of D&B at 00:21:333 - . That's why I meantion that the use of this function should be elaborated more detailedly in Taiko rule discussion thread. since it is the start of the 180BPM part, it is by itself technically a section on its own, hence it must have a bar line to indicate it has no relation to the 90BPM part. The second section (00:21:333 - ) has a red line only as a time signature reset.
> 00:42:666 - this is a new session which should share the same vol. as 00:42:999 - and 00:43:332 - do. (adding 1.0x, 70% green timing point at 00:42:666 - ) however the strong cymbal crash is noticeably louder than the rest of the section, hence why I did not use any green line there
> 01:03:832 - and 01:03:916 - how about using 80% and 85% respectively? (having 75% and 83% sounds not so balanced) I know OCD people will kill me but I used a divisor of 3 to progress from 75 to 90 (75 +7.5 -> 82.5 (83) + 7.5 -> 90)
> 02:50:582 - 70% sounds too lound imo. I think 50~60% would be an optimum one. yes!
^ 03:01:332 - You can resume using 70% right here as the melody re-join the channel again.
> 03:10:666 - no vol. change along this rising up session? oh shit nice catch
> 04:47:332 - a smoother SV change is preferred here, esp. the two at 04:47:916 - and 04:47:999 - go quite weirdly with both 1.10x, while 04:47:332 - sounds missing a 1.01x green timing point. Isolating 04:47:999 - is quite nice imo, by having these timings b4:

The position of green timing points are still in effect in the above settings. yeah, reworked

Not a fan of Undertale, runs

Chromoxx wrote:

hi

[ONI]
00:06:000 (8) - you could change this to d to emphasize the specially high pitch on 00:06:666 - and to variate and contrast with the first triplet since compared to this 00:00:666 - is a pretty high pitch it's an intermediate pitch between 7 and 9 so I rather differentiate it from 7
00:29:832 (5) - you could change this to k, to emphasize the low pitch on 00:29:999 - more, would also play more naturally imo sure
00:30:499 (10,1) - you could ctrl G these to emphasize the high pitch on 00:30:666 - would sound and play more natural too imo I understand the pitch argument but the drum base line is staying the same
00:33:165 (2) - change to k, same as before sure
00:38:665 (1) - change this to k, for the high pitch, if you feel like this plays or sounds a bit uncomfortable you can work around with the type of 5plet and some of the stuff before it maybe to make it more natural again, drum baseline is staying, but i'll work it around the high pitch in the middle
00:40:498 (5) - change to k, same reason as before. (since these kind of suggestions are coming a lot this might be going against your style etc. i'll stop pointing them out for now, but if you think these are a good idea please let me know and i'll go over these things again afterwards) this time around I'll say no, I prefer keeping the drum following here since the pattern density is higher
00:42:666 - i feel like some of the stuff in this part could be improved to fit the pitch changes of the music better or to be more structured generally in the order in which you use some patterns. for instance 00:50:666 (7) - is a very distinctly high pitch, even higher than some stuff like 00:47:999 (7) - where you mapped k on a similar hit, also the order in which you are using the triplets confuses me a bit but you might have a system behind it. Anyway i still think it could be maybe worked around with a bit to make things like that one hit i just suggested happen in a smoother way than just changing those notes to k. also stuff like 01:02:499 (14,1) - should be ctrl G'd since the last note is considerably deeper... also consider changing 01:03:332 - to d, since you can clearly hear a low high low in the melody for 01:02:665 (1,2,3) - as you might have noticed around the map, I rarely work around pitch unless it is for extra elements that do not exist in the main music layer of the song, which this case isn't. I'm always trying to focus on a consistent base patterning plus additional feats which may or may not include pitch changes.
01:08:666 (5) - change this to k, since it's a higher pitch than the last note and also feels somewhat unnatural when playing (also consistency with 01:13:999 (5) - )
03:18:165 (7,8) - ctrl G, you can feel the pitch going down to 03:18:332 - from 03:17:999 - and then up again to 03:18:666 -
03:29:164 (8,1) - same
03:29:831 (3,4) - ctrl G, you can pretty much hear a k k d kkd in the music here imo
04:20:666 (5) - change to k, similar to the stuff i mentioned earlier
04:48:499 (5,6) - ctrl G, high pitch on 04:48:666 - you could also rework this part a bit in general for smoother playability imo
05:28:332 - change this to d, lower pitch, consistency with 05:22:999 - to somewhat keep up the 1 2 1 2 but 999 has noticeably lower pitch
05:30:666 - in this part i think you could step the pace up a bit by finding a way to emphasize the sounds like 05:30:666 - 05:31:332 - 05:32:666 - etc with k in this part, maybe add some sort of triplets etc. felt kind of annoying to hear those distinct sounds in the background while playing. also following them would be hella good for buildup here, since at the moment it's just as dense as the part before and the pace of these sounds just builds up really well too. tried something
05:51:999 - i don't quite get your system on when to place kkkk and when to place kkkd in this part. You probably have one behind it, so it would be cool if you could explain it to me briefly. If not please make it a bit more organized i guess ^^ listen closely to the deep drum on 06:09:332 (9) - 06:14:666 (9) - and so on, those are the ones that have kkkd

--fin

1. 00:29:832 (5,6) - ctrl+g to avoid the awful k kdk k, and it also sounds nicer than 4 k sounds in a row imo
2. 00:46:166 (17) - d, similarly, it follows the song's xxx x rather than 4 kat sounds
3. 00:56:832 (17) - ^ preferably but if you want variation or something id even prefer d k d kdk to that xd
4. 02:00:832 (6,7,8,9) - ctrl+g to actually follow the melody more closely, and the kkds later could use some adjusting to not be so clumped up.
5. 02:18:666 - This part could really use some slight spice just to better emphasize that like 3 instruments join in lmao.
6. 03:37:499 (9,10,11,12,13,14,15,1,2,1) - This measure has 2 1/4s, I'd like to see that somewhere else here for consisency's sake (03:41:249 - ?)
   03:51:916 - ^
7. 04:29:666 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Same as 02:00:832 (6,7,8,9) -.
8. 05:28:999 (25) - 05:39:666 (14) - d hehe xd

OzzyOzrock wrote:

[ONO]

1. 00:29:832 (5,6) - ctrl+g to avoid the awful k kdk k, and it also sounds nicer than 4 k sounds in a row imo rejected for the same i told chromoxx: drum base line is untouchable
2. 00:46:166 (17) - d, similarly, it follows the song's xxx x rather than 4 kat sounds
3. 00:56:832 (17) - ^ preferably but if you want variation or something id even prefer d k d kdk to that xd
4. 02:00:832 (6,7,8,9) - ctrl+g to actually follow the melody more closely, and the kkds later could use some adjusting to not be so clumped up. changed only 02:01:166 (8) - because again drum line is staying
5. 02:18:666 - This part could really use some slight spice just to better emphasize that like 3 instruments join in lmao. ye i did stuff
6. 03:37:499 (9,10,11,12,13,14,15,1,2,1) - This measure has 2 1/4s, I'd like to see that somewhere else here for consisency's sake (03:41:249 - ?)
   03:51:916 - ^ somewhere else
7. 04:29:666 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - Same as 02:00:832 (6,7,8,9) -.
8. 05:28:999 (25) - 05:39:666 (14) - d hehe xd no mine is better

I could call more shit out but the song is too simple to care about it. Raiden map, goodbye.

Raiden wrote:

That's not "your best friend". That's still Hopes and Dreams.

Your Best Friend is Flowey's theme, not Asriel's.

1. why is countdown enabled?
2. audio bitrate higher than 192
3. many unsnapped object
   

1. 00:20:000 - i think this is not worth finisher. it lowers the emphasis at 00:21:333 -
2. 00:27:832 (9,10) - swap? d k d k is kinda boring. (10) also matched with the low drum sound
3. 04:17:249 - maybe try something like adding k here to make the kiai a bit denser than regular part (e.g 01:03:999 ~ ) ?
   > 04:19:249 - , 04:22:582 - , 04:24:582 - ^ if applied
4. 04:28:249 - maybe add note too, same as above
   > 04:29:166 - , 04:33:582 - , 04:34:499 - ^
5. 05:33:999 - k can make the next low pitched note more emphasized imo
6. unused dot because can't find anything else

Volta wrote:

hola~

[General]

1. why is countdown enabled?
2. audio bitrate higher than 192
3. many unsnapped object
   

[ONI]

1. 00:20:000 - i think this is not worth finisher. it lowers the emphasis at 00:21:333 - 00:20:500 (5) - added finisher here instead
2. 00:27:832 (9,10) - swap? d k d k is kinda boring. (10) also matched with the low drum sound
3. 04:17:249 - maybe try something like adding k here to make the kiai a bit denser than regular part (e.g 01:03:999 ~ ) ?
   > 04:19:249 - , 04:22:582 - , 04:24:582 - ^ if applied I don't really think doublets are appropriate here, they wouldn't match the rhythm
4. 04:28:249 - maybe add note too, same as above
   > 04:29:166 - , 04:33:582 - , 04:34:499 - ^
5. 05:33:999 - k can make the next low pitched note more emphasized imo
6. unused dot because can't find anything else