00:51:386 (1,2,3) - vs 00:52:104 (4,5) - object intensity feels imbalanced as when music wise they're all the same, the first one is really strong in terms of tapping but the next one goes a bit chilling
turn 00:51:386 (1,2) - into a slider makes much more sense
00:59:829 (3) - kinda get the concept of using long sliders to represent the extended vocal but imo it is a bit abused right now
00:54:619 (3) - 00:57:494 (4) - 01:06:116 (1) - 01:08:991 (4) - are cool to keep but 00:59:829 (3) - isn't, esp you did an opposite thing at 01:11:326 (3,4) -
01:08:631 - could be a note to make the pausing effect which connects the next section more impactful
01:18:332 (5,6,7) - actually I think 01:18:422 - could be just skipped and map the next triple sounds as it is really insignificant. at least add some hs on 01:18:422 (6) - if you don't want to change the rhythm
00:51:386 (1,2,3) - vs 00:52:104 (4,5) - object intensity feels imbalanced as when music wise they're all the same, the first one is really strong in terms of tapping but the next one goes a bit chilling
turn 00:51:386 (1,2) - into a slider makes much more sense
00:59:829 (3) - kinda get the concept of using long sliders to represent the extended vocal but imo it is a bit abused right now
00:54:619 (3) - 00:57:494 (4) - 01:06:116 (1) - 01:08:991 (4) - are cool to keep but 00:59:829 (3) - isn't, esp you did an opposite thing at 01:11:326 (3,4) -
01:18:332 (5,6,7) - actually I think 01:18:422 - could be just skipped and map the next triple sounds as it is really insignificant. at least add some hs on 01:18:422 (6) - if you don't want to change the rhythm