Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

**User1942406** · 01-19-2020, 12:39 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

good luck with uso james lmfao

**psychoangel691** · 03-9-2020, 02:03 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

VisD took on this set as I haven't heard from James in a while, James did leave a few notes on files so I'll leave those here as well. This is the first set VisD has done so if you notice any issues/errors just be kind about it and we can always review anything mentioned.

Accepted:
The Glorious (Final Sketch Mix) 9.5/10
Right Back 8.5/10
DANCE WITH 12 GAUGE 8.5/10
Labradorite 8/10

Conditional:
I detail the conditions at the end of that file’s review.
Line Theta 8.5/10: minijack clarifications
Robot Truck Driver 8/10: set the offset
Handle Your Business 7.5/10: tone down the 2 huge difficulty spikes
Wine & Roses 7/10: Jump layering

Rejected:
Warrior 6/10

Pass:
I’d like someone with more experience on files at this level to take a look. Sorry for the extra wait.
G e n g a o z o
GIGAHERTZ
Uso and Braindead Berzerker

Dance With 12 Gauge (AutotelicBrown) [8.5/10]

26.640-26.765 vs. 30.640-30.765: not really sure why these are different - the first set seems to fit the layering scheme better
37.765-39.915: I appreciate the effort for nice PR here but in contrast to the beginning, this feels like too much at the cost of some playability. This section is so right-hand dominant, lots of hidden rh minitrills that require way more control than anything else
59.515: Maybe a minijack on the 1 - like you do with 63.765?
72.765: In this section the jumps are a bit confusing to me. If these jumps are now going to the percussion as additive layering, then something like 73.390 75.015 77.390 etc (piano + percussion). should probably also be jumps instead of 73.265 77.265 etc
78.515-79.015:Hmm. If these are purely for the low synth the 8th is a ghost and the 16th after should be on the 2 column imo. If you’re also stepping the percussion then 78.765 wants something too
86.265, 69.765, 91.765 etc.: don't see why you can't have the jumps here, personally I’d really like to see them. They really don't make these trilly patterns that much harder and filling them in feel even more satisfying to hit imo, esp. the one at 93.765

Very solid file in all senses. Just some few minor inconsistencies in the section with the jumps, everything else is “hmm, consider this too…”. Great job.

Handle Your Business (ositzxz369) [*7.5/10]

19.229: not sure why these two notes are the only color theory bits around here, considering that sound and similar ones happen pretty often
48.396: color this to match the next 192nd?
59.063: Yeah - you gotta decide if you want to color theorize these or not
77.313.119.979: Eh. I get the jack on the vocals here, but this is pretty rough at the speed. Earlier, the 16th jacks were always pretty isolated, but this is in the middle of a fairly fast burst. I’d honestly much prefer to see these two jacks gone.

Technically, everything is solid and good, file’s quite nice - reminiscent of a better October (and that’s not a bad file by any means), but I'm CQing this for a reason you can probably guess...

CONDITIONAL: The big 32nd burst walls are 360bpm 16ths, or 24nps. They're clearly stepped to be jumptrillable for the most part, and I appreciate that patterning effort, but there’s still some rough bits and I'm not taking the risk of having them convert badly and all of a sudden you end up with a file that's basically ~low FMO for the most part and then two huge gigantic spikes where you can't really manipulate and have to really stream at 360 to hit correctly. Please simplify the patterns to ensure that they don’t represent too much of a difficulty wall (e.g to start, maybe removing the jumps inside them?). For reference, I'm talking about the bursts beginning 67.729 and 110.396. The last one at 121.396’s fine as is (although if you do remove the jumps from the previous walls, then this one should change accordingly too).

Labradorite (bmah) [8/10]

OFFSET: could probably be a shade later. This review’s timestamps will use your offset, but if you look @ waveforms the peaks are definitely slightly later throughout
4.912: Not quite understanding this 16th
Pretty intro.
12.866, 17.998, etc: feels like these parts are crying out for something to the drum fills, considering you step the more distinct ones with 24ths.
20.840: Eh..a jump here seems overemphasized. Not technically wrong, but personally would rather see a single to express the big sudden decrease in presence from the previous 8th
41.051: subtle but nice, well-deserved minijack on the 8th here
65.998: Same as previous note about the bursts. Clearly a deliberate choice at this point but I wonder if the file would be better with /something/. You've had mostly 8th jumps for quite a while now, after all.
80.840: 4 8ths starting here would be better represented as 4 8th jacks or a descending scale imo - 1122 here but it's audibly lowering in pitch. maybe 4433?
85.893: a little mean but sure why not
94.498: the descending scale here starts on the 16th, not the 4th prior
106.024: Given how much emphasis on the melody you have here, definitely feels like something more to the lilt in this area could be helpful
108.472: not sure I understand some of the 16ths going on here. all the 16ths except 108.551 don't have any drum hits to them, and if the 4321 at the end is for the flourish, I feel like you've ignored a lot of similar and even more prominent bursts to that prior, so why this particular one?
111.235: sure you don’t want something additional here too…?
117.314: this part was LOTS of fun on my playthrough. Quads are underrated
122.366: ah there’s the bmah. Not as bmahy as usual, actually...PR on 123.156 wants [34], but let’s be real, that wasn’t going to happen was it

.
132.472: not a jump

Overall: A pretty (the adjective, not the adverb), midlevel file. Very understandable layering and PR. Questions above are mostly minor; on my initial playthrough I did feel like the middle part did drag out a little and could definitely be spiced up by stepping some of the drum fills, because right now it seems mildly random which ones you choose to step and not step. My guess is that you clearly are favoring the sort of “break” you can get by not stepping them in (having the 4ths prior almost be like holds, in a sense), and I respect that.

Line-Theta (gold stinger) [*8.5/10]

I'm gay for bpm changes this was a hoot to play thank you
3.178: y e e
18.563: good job eschewing the conventional layering on 4ths until 19.332. I like
22.455: this minijack (with the prior 192nd), ew
22.793: this section, first, ok, YES but secondly. I'm not actually hearing why there's all these jumps that aren't on 4ths. I can sort of vaguely pick out some emphasis on a really low rate, but I'm not convinced at all that this translates well at 1x.

This note applies to its twin at around 73s too - these two sections (the one at the end, too, but that’s not as bad) combined are the difficulty peaks of this file, and justifiably so (musically), but I think that can still be the case even when the jumps/nasty patternings are toned down slightly.

45.295: OK normally I wouldn't write a comment like this, because the thing where only 1/2 note of a jump/hand is dedicated to color theory/accenting is pretty common in FFR. But, and this is going way above and beyond - matching the very high bar set by the rest of your file, if you're going to color theory this you might as well just accent the entire jump (and the 2 after) instead of having the split thing like this which is slightly less pleasant to read and play.

52.026: lol what do you think about making all these into making these all [34] and the 4th at 52.411 [134]? Matches the symmetry of the [12] 12th set from earlier, and fits the music better than this almost-there half-pattern change you have at the end of this beat
54.622: If this is a jack, why isn’t 54.911, and why isn’t the 16th at 55.391 stepped at all?
58.757: Hmm..not sure about this being a jack, and if you do want a jack here, why isn’t 61.738?
59.911: ^?
62.699: Not sure why this is a jack? I feel like I might not be completely understanding some of your logic behind when/where jacks are deployed tbh
67.411: Not sure about this minijack. And in the preceding section, there seem to be far fewer jacks than the musically identical phrase right before it?
75.201: kinda ew
81.835: i snorted. this sounds like a balloon peeing
82.604: 44 for PR on this, and the one after, a minijack lower than 4?
* 98.373: I'm really not hearing a reason for the jack on the 3 like this
* 100.873: ^ on the 2 - maybe [134] instead?
110.103: still confused over this minijack and the one prior

Basically kono spoon... but like an evolved, moderny form of it. Love it. You also avoided stepping some usual boring schemes like typical 32nds on distorted sounds, instead going for a heavier approach. A very interesting file, big yes, just conditional on clearing up the minijack usage in the section around 52.411 -- I might just be missing something about how they're used, so feel free to just explain to me about how it works if that's the case. Not conditional on 22.793 etc., you can keep those if you insist, but strongly recommend at least toning down some of the anchors (look at the 1 and 3 column in the first set starting 22.793...)

CONDITIONAL: Minijack clarification in the section between 52.411-67.795, and the mean 3-jacks at 98.373 and 100.873

Right Back (bmah) [8.5/10]

44.286 could be a jump too if you like
In the preceding section, the 4ths are just fillers on the vocal breaks when there’s no vocal or melody to step; wonder if that might play out confusing to newer players?
93.883+: mmmm...for the newer players, babby's first ffr solo
95.727, 101.534, 103.560, etc: consider making these jumps - the one at 103.560 where there's a wide break at least. You have much harder stuff in this file, I think you can afford some more accent here

Great varied ez file. Solo makes the file a little spicier than your usual diff~20 fare.

Robot Truck Driver (devonin) [*8/10]

*OFFSET: is quite a bit off...oh, you didn’t set it at all... - the review will use your 0 offset for timestamps, but you definitely want /some/ offset here

10.200 etc: song got more intense v. prior part - not sure about dropping the jumps on these like this. Fine to drop them at m16 instead imo.
13.651 etc: no reason to not have the 8th in here
23.701: [12] pr?
28.502: slightly awkward for this to be the lonely soul with no partner
55.654: yeet
66.604: PR on these 4th jumps - strictly descending
93.607: I want to say that this should be 4 16ths arrows too (like the previous), given how the bursts have gradually been building up and this one is exactly the same musically sa the previous
94.507: make this a 2 for pr
110.333: you can definitely make this 4 arrows now, and the last one after this too.
Or, even better: just don't make that one burst the only 4 arrow long one - it doesn't seem special musically to me

Nice easy file! Thanks for stepping TORLEY - he's underrated and how we don't have more files by him is a fiffer community crime.

I also note that in your comments you were chiefly concerned about the bursts, but what you have is fine. The 12ths are synced close enough when leading into 4ths, and the 16ths after the 4ths are fine too. For newer players I wouldn't even be super concerned about that, honestly. I'd say just remove the 8th at the end of the only 4-note burst you have (it's kind of a ghost anyway, if you listen to it on a low rate the sound ends before we hit the 8th).

CONDITIONAL: Only must-fix is the offset, it’s significantly off right now and it’s good to get it perfect for newer players.

Warrior (Ghost_Medley) [6/10]

22.628: Try as I might I can't quite figure out what the 16ths in this section are guiding me to follow. My best guess is that the 16ths you’re trying to express are almost universally just triplets on each 4th - I’m really not hearing the special cases which start on the 8ths or the ones that drop the 8th (XX-XX). Right now these 16ths just seem pretty random, like there's a very distinct note on 33.481 that's just completely missed.
36.589 42.216 ghosts in this layering context? No kicks there.

51.392: feels like a jump based on surrounding layering context
51.569: definitely a jump here, sharing at least one column with the th before, and both (mini jumpjack) if you opt for the jump on 51.392
next 2 8ths don't seem to fit in as jumps?
52.981: pr
54.304: yeah if this is going to be a jump 51.392/51.569 should probably be too imo
54.392: probably want a 4th here considering how much you've acknowledged the kick in this file
54.657: there's actually a note here. I can understand not wanting to jack it for perfect PR but consider filling it in on a different column

59.245: of all the places to start using jacks, this seems like an unusual choice; the sound is somewhat less noticeable compared to stuff you've stepped as 16ths
61.187: ghost
61.981: ehh, can't say i'm a fan of these jacks (this and the one before and the ones after). big difficulty spike in this file at this speed given the file's history so far, and they're going to one of the least musically prominent elements in this section. you've got some cool cranky vocals going in the foreground, if you want to have jacks for spice - and these jacks are the difficulty peak in this file -, perhaps consider making them to the ultraprominent foreground vocals instead? (don't just jack all the vocals of course, but e.g. 61.451-61.539 when the voice is 'wa-nna' where we have close sounds is something you could consider, for instance imo.)
64.098: oof - the jacks are nicely going to the vocals here, but this is a SPIKE. transition on LH at this speed for a file that has been like D3 difficulty up to this section is no joke. in any case the last 16th is a ghost if following vocals; so just remove that and maybe move 64.451 to a different column (optional) and we gucci
70.275: Hmm - I get the jack, but forcing it like this on the LH with the contextual LH strain is...very hard for this file. You don’t even do this in the repeat. I personally think this pattern is somewhat unpleasant in the context of this file and its prior difficulty levels

82.186: if you're going to stick to your guns and make this sort of thing a jack, then presumably stuff like 83.598 needs to be too. and possibly later on too around 97s where suddenly you let up on them (I can understand why you chose to do that though, not an objective error or anything).

91.804: Starting here and until the end there’s suddenly lots of 4ths that aren’t jumps. I can sort of see why, but this feels somewhat inconsistent considering how adamantly you stepped all 4ths as jumps in the clone of this part earlier in the song; maybe go back and make all of them jumps if you're going to stick to what you did earlier. Alternatively (and this is probably better, but more time-consuming), re-think how you use jumps so that we don’t have all 4th jumps earlier on in the file (e..g in the section starting m8) so you have more nuance and flexibility in layering jumps in later on.
110.863: anchor ahoy - intentional?

Overall, file was almost there, I was on the fence. But there’s just a number of different things to fix across different aspects of the file, so please consider the suggestions I’ve made above.

Wine & Roses (M0nkeyz) [*7/10]

19.356 seems kinda random for this to be the first jump. You skip the first 6 (2 per measure) and then start on the 7th...would rather you skip 2 more (skipping 8 total) and start on the 9th, at 22.029, when there is a noticeable musical change (entered the 2nd set of 4 measures)

32.859 34.530 37.192 39.857 50.523 etc not convinced about jumps like these - this 16th isnt more pronounced than the others, the bass hits on the 4ths and 8ths are what's really noticeable. 36.191 for eg is fine, since that's clearly bass boosted

conversely missing jumps at 38.692 43.525 49.359 and similar
43.693 for PR reasons feel like this shouldn't be the same as the completely different sounding 4th prior

57.719 flute instrument + vocal only, sure, but I think this is a ghost for either of those

Next section kinda repeats, so just same notes as above, a couple of points where the jumps should and shouldn't be based on the bass.
70.693: appreciate the effort to change up the pattern here
84.023: imo either step the grace note on this 4th for a break signifier, or continue the piano in the next beats (which plays more than 8ths), this intermediate follows neither instrument properly

87.028: pr cf previous set of jumps - move these jumps upwards from [12]
92.026: jump
more jumps that I'd consider removing, as per previous 2 sections, e.g. 89.527
93.705: i get the 1st 192nd here but this one's a ghost
106.698: 4 for pr
107.198: missing
same pattern of 4 notes on the 32nd repeats, xxx_x - check as necessary
110.698: would really like to see this and the next 16th as 44 (jacked, for melody pr)
111.365: missing
118.031: ^
120.698: 14 to match previous 2 notes' PR, and it's also debatable whether the 2 notes after need to be around at all
(same stuff repeats, skipping over that.)
121.781: need 16th after this 32nd - extra note. Can step for when this flutey motif appears later on too.

I'm skipping over the remainder of the song, because at this point it's basically the same thing, just with extra flutey motifs and new jumps here and there, so just take the previous notes and apply to the final 1/3.

So, this file is fundamentally technically good. Incredible song with lots of care and thought shown in making the PR solid, and thank you for stepping something more unusual for FFR (new artist, less common genre -> very much what FFR needs). I was on the fence about accepting this outright, but I can't help but feel like with a file this simple, I'd like to see:

CONDITIONAL:
the jump layering should be consistent. A few missed here and there is fine, but there were enough over the length of the file that I feel either I'm missing something about how the jumps are being layered (message me if this is the case), or it's possible you might want to take a very close listen to make sure you pick up on all the little bass hits during the slow jumpstream parts.

BONUS NOTE (not conditional on this):
This is clearly a personal decision, but what are your thoughts on *some* kind of cut? This file is very long for what it offers. I understand being super passionate about a song and wanting to have it whole to do justice to it, but my opinion is that this file’s replayability value is hurt significantly by it being nearly 4min when most of what the file has to offer (musically) is all within the first 55s (end of the first js). Everything after that is mainly variations on a theme, and the file shows it too. I think cutting it would encourage more people to play it in-game.

Please fix these couple of things and get it off CQ, FFR can do with something different like this.

The Glorious (Final Sketch Mix) (EzExZeRo7497)[9.5/10]

9.340: somehwat unusual to start the burst on a 16th when the sound itself starts prior. Add the 8th immediately before this
10.320: Subtle layering in not making this all jumps. Nice
23.936: REALLY like stuff like this, thank you
31.167: missing 24th (last note in the sound, and the 2-note burst right now plays kind of off balanced)
38.244: in this section, what do you think about putting jumps, or at least recoloring points like these when the sound is a little longer than usual, for extra accenting? you kind of do it with the 8+196 at 37.897, could be interesting to do it consistently. Also not sure why the 16th prior is a 16th not a 192nd like the others
41.013+: these really just feel like singles to me, especially since you take special pains to do the same thing as singles in a much heavier part earlier on (see the 10.320 note). Gives a bigger contrast to the huge stuff coming up right after too.
60.397: not sure why this is a jump. not anymore pronounced than the percussion before and after it, in fact, the 8th right after is even louder
77.070: missing 16th
98.205: this burst should be same length as the one prior, missing a 24th at the end here
116.359: jump? the repeat after is a jump on this 8th.
125.013: not sure if we really need this 6-note anchor on 1 here; either the two jumps in the middle should break the chain (preferred), or the last two jumps should given the distinctions in sound

Glorious song and file, not much else to say, get this ingame asap i want to flail my fingers poorly at it

**psychoangel691** · 03-9-2020, 02:08 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

These are the notes I do have from James

Dance With 12 Gauge (AutotelicBrown) [8/10]

This reminds me of Corpse Party a lot, definitely a good sign

57.515 - Jump here
1:15.015 - Since you�re following the jumps to the piano, this should be a jump as well
1:28.390 - Jump here to follow up the 4th jump prior to it, Preferably have it be [14][34]
1:29.765 - Jump here
1:29.827 to 1:29.952 - This part is actually a 24th. Have it be: 3124 (this is starting from the 4th on 1:29.765)
1:30.890 - Missing 16th here since you�re following the piano melody
1:31.765 - Jump
1:31.765 to 1:31.890 - Same comment as I mention in the 1:29.827 marker
1:33.515 to 1:33.765 - While it is correct, the sound is too faint to really warrant that trill. Just a nitpick from me, don�t have to remove it, but just a suggestion.
1:33.515 - Jump here
1:33.765 - Jump here
1:35.515 to 1:35.765 - Same as the comment I made in 1:33.515 about the trill
1:35.515 - Jump
1:35.765 - Jump

G e n g a o z o (DarkZtar) [/]

Judge Notes: offset should be 1.592, gonna be using times from this fixed offset

25.121 to 26.690 - Where do those 32nds go?
*28.160 to 28.356 (and similar instances leading up to 39.239) - Sound doesn�t sound like it�s going to the triple jacks. And another note to make here, not sure if it�s the result of me fixing the offset or not but, most of the jacks in this section aren�t justified to be placed in this section and sounded like they were meant to be put just prior to where you placed the jacks. For example: Using the 28.160 instance, The jack itself sounded like it starts on the 8th jump on 28.062 and ends on the 4th jump on 28.258, and so forth. The jack placements sounded like you started them a 16th later than anticipated. This section needs to be combed down and rearranged accordingly.
40.611, 42.180, etc - Where does this 4 note jack go to?
51.788 - That quad isn�t very cash money of you. But seriously, the quad itself feels out of place in terms of transition.

Labradorite(bmah)[/]

Judge Notes: offset is -0.643

Robot Truck Driver (devonin) [/]
devonin�s Comments:
Pre-existing permission for Torley Wong, including the 'TORLEY' version with a song already in the game under that particular name.

The 16th notes on the grace note runs at 55.65, and then repeatedly in the 1:26.35-1:45.60 sound correct to me, but they may be off, as in some places it feels like there are three notes (the 16th note sections) and in some it sounds like there are two notes (as the 24ths starting at 1:16) so I expect there will be some correction requested by judges with a better ear for precision.

Judge Notes: Dev. Why you do this to me. The offset is wrong aaaaaa. Offset is -0.030

10.230 - You started deviating the jump layering you had for this sound and that jump sound is still prevalent up until

The Glorious (Final Sketch Mix) (EzExZeRo7497)[9/10]

Judge Notes: I actually have nothing to point out that would cause me to pass up on this. Wow. I would say to double check on the 16ths on 49.378, 49.494, 49.724 & 49.840 as I don�t quite catch those 16ths being emphasized. Just double check that and you should be good to go! Fantastic file~

Uso and Braindead Berzerker (DourGent) [8.5/10]

Judge Notes: Dour, what the fuck are these patterns lmfao. It made my sides fucking orbit lmao. I love it. This is gonna piss off a lot of people but this file is hilarious and I love it. Just some minor mistakes, but fuck lmao. I love this.

13.933 - Jump here
23.893 - missing 12th note here to accentuate the coin sound
28.756 - Jump here
28.932 - Missing 32nd here
1:22.108 - double check this 32nd, don�t hear the emphasis on this warranting the jack
+1:26.637 to 1:29.226 - LMAO
1:29.226 to 1:29.461 - Would love if this bit got emphasized juuuuust a tiny bit.

Passed files will be looked at by TC_Halogen in the next few days.

**gold stinger** · 03-9-2020, 05:25 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Originally posted by psychoangel691

Line-Theta (gold stinger) [*8.5/10]

22.793: this section, first, ok, YES but secondly. I'm not actually hearing why there's all these jumps that aren't on 4ths. I can sort of vaguely pick out some emphasis on a really low rate, but I'm not convinced at all that this translates well at 1x.

This note applies to its twin at around 73s too - these two sections (the one at the end, too, but that�s not as bad) combined are the difficulty peaks of this file, and justifiably so (musically), but I think that can still be the case even when the jumps/nasty patternings are toned down slightly.

-I can change to singles between 4th jumps for better taste. Not a problem.

45.295: OK normally I wouldn't write a comment like this, because the thing where only 1/2 note of a jump/hand is dedicated to color theory/accenting is pretty common in FFR. But, and this is going way above and beyond - matching the very high bar set by the rest of your file, if you're going to color theory this you might as well just accent the entire jump (and the 2 after) instead of having the split thing like this which is slightly less pleasant to read and play.

-Changed to just regular coloring. Personally not a fan of colorizing whole jumps in favor of vocals.

52.026: lol what do you think about making all these into making these all [34] and the 4th at 52.411 [134]? Matches the symmetry of the [12] 12th set from earlier, and fits the music better than this almost-there half-pattern change you have at the end of this beat

-The jacks will be way too fast for majority of people in that speed. 20ths at 156bpm start to get close to 16th You Universe jack speed, and those are not fun, even when downgrading to singles. To preserve that flavor while keeping it tasteful, used a pseudo-jumpglut transition between two jumptrills.

54.622: If this is a jack, why isn�t 54.911, and why isn�t the 16th at 55.391 stepped at all?

-fixed

58.757: Hmm..not sure about this being a jack, and if you do want a jack here, why isn�t 61.738?

- fixed, unintended jack.

59.911: ^?

- also fixed. Moved single 4th to 4, flowing into a [12][34].

62.699: Not sure why this is a jack? I feel like I might not be completely understanding some of your logic behind when/where jacks are deployed tbh

- same pattern flow as the jack at 59.622, 54.622 and 56.449 (which was missed, and made into a jack).

67.411: Not sure about this minijack. And in the preceding section, there seem to be far fewer jacks than the musically identical phrase right before it?

- Cleaned up jacks quite a bit in the section that you mentioned. Should be much more clean now. For this particular one, it was moved back to the 16th in a [13][14][23] pattern, to mimic previous jacks in the section.

82.604: 44 for PR on this, and the one after, a minijack lower than 4?

- You got it.

* 98.373: I'm really not hearing a reason for the jack on the 3 like this

- fixed, is now a 1[34]2[134] jumpstream flow.

* 100.873: ^ on the 2 - maybe [134] instead?

- changed the flow of the section so that the [134] could be put in without creating some unintended sustained jacks.

110.103: still confused over this minijack and the one prior

- changed the jacks here to flow much better. No more jacks.

Basically kono spoon... but like an evolved, moderny form of it. Love it. You also avoided stepping some usual boring schemes like typical 32nds on distorted sounds, instead going for a heavier approach. A very interesting file, big yes, just conditional on clearing up the minijack usage in the section around 52.411 -- I might just be missing something about how they're used, so feel free to just explain to me about how it works if that's the case. Not conditional on 22.793 etc., you can keep those if you insist, but strongly recommend at least toning down some of the anchors (look at the 1 and 3 column in the first set starting 22.793...)

Appended fixes to the file, which are in bold in the above quote. Sent in the fix.

**EzExZeRo7497** · 03-9-2020, 10:40 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Originally posted by psychoangel691

The Glorious (Final Sketch Mix) (EzExZeRo7497)[9.5/10]

9.340: somehwat unusual to start the burst on a 16th when the sound itself starts prior. Add the 8th immediately before this
10.320: Subtle layering in not making this all jumps. Nice
23.936: REALLY like stuff like this, thank you
31.167: missing 24th (last note in the sound, and the 2-note burst right now plays kind of off balanced)
38.244: in this section, what do you think about putting jumps, or at least recoloring points like these when the sound is a little longer than usual, for extra accenting? you kind of do it with the 8+196 at 37.897, could be interesting to do it consistently. Also not sure why the 16th prior is a 16th not a 192nd like the others
41.013+: these really just feel like singles to me, especially since you take special pains to do the same thing as singles in a much heavier part earlier on (see the 10.320 note). Gives a bigger contrast to the huge stuff coming up right after too.
60.397: not sure why this is a jump. not anymore pronounced than the percussion before and after it, in fact, the 8th right after is even louder
77.070: missing 16th
98.205: this burst should be same length as the one prior, missing a 24th at the end here
116.359: jump? the repeat after is a jump on this 8th.
125.013: not sure if we really need this 6-note anchor on 1 here; either the two jumps in the middle should break the chain (preferred), or the last two jumps should given the distinctions in sound

Glorious song and file, not much else to say, get this ingame asap i want to flail my fingers poorly at it

9.340: Not sure what happened there, thought I started with a 8th in the SM version. Thanks.

31.167: Used an ascending burst instead to differentiate it from the other two bursts. I used a 2-note burst at first because I thought the buzz was a bit softer, but it's just higher-pitched.

38.244: I like the idea, but there aren't any appropriate accents for this except making this an 8th. I don't think that a double would be a good idea because of the buzz's timbre.

41.013+: I get what you mean with the contrast between the doubles here and the rest of the chart, though I don't think that it'd make sense to use doubles given that there are sounds earlier in the chart (the bass kicks that I did layer as doubles) are softer. At the very least, the bass kicks here are a lot clearer than the ones that I layered as singles earlier on.

60.397: You're right, my mistake. I made this and the note after singles.

77.070: yeah

98.205 (and about all of the other 24th bursts that end with triples):

intentional; I have a tendency of removing a note before the actual end of each 24th burst because I think minijacks that come with full 24th bursts and end with triples are a bit overkill for the most part.

116.359: yeah

125.013: I was pretty adamant on breaking the [12] jumpjack into [12][34] because I've used [12]/[34] jumpjacks throughout the chart for consecutive bass kicks, but I guess that this is a special situation because of the sounds surrounding it (much shriller in comparison). Changed the [12][12] jumpjack into [12][34].

Did a few changes other than those. Thanks for the notes. Will update the chart later.

Regarding James' notes: I have to check a few things about how FFR judging deals with intentional ghost notes because I'm not entirely sure on them. The notes are indeed ghost (and they're intentionally ghost notes), but I don't know if I have to remove them. I'm not willing to do so because the sounds that "go" to the 16ths (not literally) are notably different from other sounds that I've layered as [12] (bass kicks), and those sounds last for much longer and are more salient than bass kicks.

**bmah** · 03-9-2020, 11:57 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Labradorite:

OFFSET: Fixed to -0.636. Saw James May's offset suggestion of -0.643 as well but it felt too late in several areas.
4.912: Goes to the guitar.
12.866, 17.998, etc: Yeah, I know what you mean, it's tempting right? Upon closer inspection, the marching band-esque drumroll is pretty slurred in the way it sounds, so it's hard for me to justify putting a short burst in these sections. Also, I wanted the file to be a bit easier. This actually was originally going to be an easier file, but it turned into a mid-level file that's somewhat moderated.
65.998: Same thing as above, just as you suspected. Btw, I experimented with some 32nds of varying lengths, but unfortunately none really felt right. Something else I noticed: those drumrolls are actually of varying lengths of duration, alternating between long and short drumrolls.
80.840: It seems that the vocals are ascending while the strings are descending. You're right about the 1122 drums actually descending instead of ascending; I'm thinking I did this as a result of the ascending [12] [23] jumps following the vocals instead. I shifted this entire section and now it works along with the drums descending.
94.498: The scale does begin at the 4th though.
106.024: I totally missed the strings here. Thanks for pointing that out. Added a 24th flourish.
108.472: Ah yeah, the first 16th at 108.56s is a 16th kick, but the remainder of the 16ths is not percussions nor violin flourishes but...surprise! The guitar!

111.235: In line with 106.024s, I also missed the strings here as well. Added!
122.366: Actually I ended up changing this part quite a bit since, but let's just say the pattern now ends in a [14] jump.

Right Back:

44.286: This file was a balance between getting the rhythms I wanted expressed, but not making it too layered that it would be difficult for newer players to follow. So you have sections where the layering is just vocals + the occasional keyboard going to slightly complex polyrhythms, and then 4th beat stepping when those more rhythmically confusing sections ease up. devonin once pointed out that newer players score better with songs that have a more evenly-filled chart than an emptier one in which the lack of arrows may make it harder to pick up on the rhythm. Hence my addition of 4ths when the song isn't busy.
95.727, 101.534, 103.560, etc: Good point; I followed through on most of them. The jumps seem to occur when the piano plays slight gallops (well, more like jazzy accentuations that are like very tight two-note ornaments).

**ositzxz369** · 03-10-2020, 03:30 AM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Handle Your Business is now updated. Changes made: Removed white note color theory completely, nerfed vocal jacks on 77.313/119.979, and hopefully made all the 32nd burst walls jumptrillable.

**VisD** · 03-10-2020, 08:03 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

wait, you made me respond on discord but you didn't even take in what i said. ??

the only ones of those you quoted that I kept in my response was:
"39.857
50.523...I still don't hear these - there's the hihat on them that gives the wave filter spike"

I'm good with everything else

**M0nkeyz** · 03-10-2020, 08:20 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Oh my bad, I completely missed 2 lines of what you wrote. Sorry!

Thought you said ''I still don't hear these''

Forget what I wrote

**Not devonin** · 03-12-2020, 07:47 AM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Robot Truck Driver (devonin) [*8/10]

The 16th notes on the grace note runs at 55.65, and then repeatedly in the 1:26.35-1:45.60 sound correct to me, but they may be off, as in some places it feels like there are three notes (the 16th note sections) and in some it sounds like there are two notes (as the 24ths starting at 1:16) so I expect there will be some correction requested by judges with a better ear for precision.

Judge Notes:
*OFFSET: is quite a bit off...oh, you didn’t set it at all... - the review will use your 0 offset for timestamps, but you definitely want /some/ offset here

They feel correct to me, and if you can argue that one or two don't have enough distinct sounds to be three notes instead of two, I'd rather they all stay three so the pattern is consistent.

i have no idea what you're talking about re: offset. It is absolutely correct on my end.

**VisD** · 03-12-2020, 01:28 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Originally posted by Not devonin

They feel correct to me, and if you can argue that one or two don't have enough distinct sounds to be three notes instead of two, I'd rather they all stay three so the pattern is consistent.

i have no idea what you're talking about re: offset. It is absolutely correct on my end.

just for posterity's sake because i've had psychoangel remove James May's stuff from my notes, wanted to make it clear here that I didn't write that - my full review is a lot more complimentary and detailed with actual things pointed out other than the bursts.

**AutotelicBrown** · 03-12-2020, 02:53 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Updated my file based on VisD's notes and some stuff I noticed since I submitted. As for James May's notes, they either refer to intentional omissions or are incorrect (I believe he got mixed up with the heavy reverb on the piano).

26.640-26.765 vs. 30.640-30.765: not really sure why these are different - the first set seems to fit the layering scheme better

My mistake, not sure what I was doing but I probably thought there was an extra guitar strum in the second iteration.

37.765-39.915: I appreciate the effort for nice PR here but in contrast to the beginning, this feels like too much at the cost of some playability. This section is so right-hand dominant, lots of hidden rh minitrills that require way more control than anything else

I actually spent quite a bit of time balancing this section and I'm pretty sure it's comparable if not easier than the following jumpjack section and the ending trills. Only exception would be for MA, but this is for FFR anyway.

59.515: Maybe a minijack on the 1 - like you do with 63.765?

Hard to justify anything in this section as it goes more by feel than what is objectively happening. In any case this thing you mentioned is just from a slight difference in context.

72.765: In this section the jumps are a bit confusing to me. If these jumps are now going to the percussion as additive layering, then something like 73.390 75.015 77.390 etc (piano + percussion). should probably also be jumps instead of 73.265 77.265 etc

There are two independent piano phrases in this part and the jumps go the one outlining a melody similar to the strings at 80.265 and the bell at 88.265.

78.515-79.015:Hmm. If these are purely for the low synth the 8th is a ghost and the 16th after should be on the 2 column imo. If you�re also stepping the percussion then 78.765 wants something too

Changed this part to only follow the low synth + piano. Also changed the pattern a bit to include minijacks to the low synth.

86.265, 69.765, 91.765 etc.: don't see why you can't have the jumps here, personally I�d really like to see them. They really don't make these trilly patterns that much harder and filling them in feel even more satisfying to hit imo, esp. the one at 93.765

The last two 5 note 32nd trills are exactly the reason I decided to not include those jumps. They detract from the trill itself (which also extends with notes before and after) and lean on being harder than they should.

In any case I changed the patterning a bit from 94.015-96.265 to include the minijack at 94.390 that I missed and to follow the trills more precisely.

Other than those notes, I removed a ghost 32nd at 89.953 and possibly some minor changes I forgot.

**Not devonin** · 03-12-2020, 03:18 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

Originally posted by VisD

just for posterity's sake because i've had psychoangel remove James May's stuff from my notes, wanted to make it clear here that I didn't write that - my full review is a lot more complimentary and detailed with actual things pointed out other than the bursts.

<3 VisD

**Not devonin** · 03-12-2020, 03:58 PM

Re: Nov/Dec 2019 Set 2

10.200 etc: song got more intense v. prior part - not sure about dropping the jumps on these like this. Fine to drop them at m16 instead imo.

My usual answer to "Why'd you just follow one part instead of layering" is "So the song's difficulty stays lower"

13.651 etc: no reason to not have the 8th in here

That 8th is a bass drum hit though right? I'd been just following the melody at this part which is why I didn't include it, or else a bunch of the other singles would have been jumps.

Honest opinion, do you think the chart itself is improved enough by layering more into that section versus my desire to keep things simple/following melody/lower difficulty? I can do it if you think it makes like...an objectively better chart, but if it's just a preference for more layering, I tend to want to keep it simple.

23.701: [12] pr?

[12] would be pr for the preceding section since it's lower in pitch than the last jump of the preceding part before the pause, but was made a [12] in order to be pr as the -start- of the -next- section of six jumps that end on a lower pitch than that. If you've got some insight as to how to restructure the second set to start from a [12] and stay pr and flowing, I'd happily change it up, but the range of pitches didn't feel like I could do the whole multi-phrase part in proper pr, so I split it up between the long pause and sort of "reset" the pr if that makes sense?

28.502: slightly awkward for this to be the lonely soul with no partner

Hehe, lonely soul. I like it. This is another case of me going "not sure how to keep this PR and jumps" since the [12] goes -up- to [14] so the only ways I could make it go back down would be [34] or [23] and those both caused a double hit on an arrow that I was trying to avoid, but it definitely does seem more out of place to be a single than to have two consecutive hits on 4 so I'll add that in

55.654: yeet

woot

66.604: PR on these 4th jumps - strictly descending

I've been using [14] as like, an overflow for when I come up against [34] and need to go higher. What's the like...accepted way to go one above [34] and back down better? Does it mitigate the weirdness here that I did it in a few other places as well?

93.607: I want to say that this should be 4 16ths arrows too (like the previous), given how the bursts have gradually been building up and this one is exactly the same musically sa the previous

Done, fixed.

94.507: make this a 2 for pr

Are you sure? I listened to it again, and it sounds definitely lower than the 2 before it.

110.333: you can definitely make this 4 arrows now, and the last one after this too.
Or, even better: just don't make that one burst the only 4 arrow long one - it doesn't seem special musically to me

I also note that in your comments you were chiefly concerned about the bursts, but what you have is fine. The 12ths are synced close enough when leading into 4ths, and the 16ths after the 4ths are fine too. For newer players I wouldn't even be super concerned about that, honestly. I'd say just remove the 8th at the end of the only 4-note burst you have (it's kind of a ghost anyway, if you listen to it on a low rate the sound ends before we hit the 8th).

By "that one burst" do you mean the one at 1:45.300? I feel like I can definitely hear 4 notes in there versus 3 in the others, but my ear is not necessarily the best at that. I pulled it out and it still basically feels fine, so I'll put in the change!

Nice easy file! Thanks for stepping TORLEY - he's underrated and how we don't have more files by him is a fiffer community crime.

Thanks, I completely agree, though altogether we actually have what...13 of his songs? They're just mostly under Torley Wong instead of TORLEY but yes, I have a few more tracks of his in mind to also submit.

Thanks much for the comments and time, and hopefully if you are willing, some responses to my questions/confusions above