You Don't Know :: FFR Batch Submission
VisD - You Don't Know - Aaron Spectre [5 / 10]
Feb/March 2021
PublicEvents
Released
skater punk breakcore in 2021 lol

https://drumcorps.bandcamp.com/track/you-dont-know
Track is CC BY-NC-SA 3.0

If go in-game, would strongly like for OT14 (~86 diff) as it's pretty varied and somewhat different from the usual breakcore chart/song

Simfile Folder Name

You Don't Know (VisD)

Note Count

2390

Chart Length

2:59

Average NPS

13.925

Estimated Difficulty

90.77

First Note

0:07

Ending Note Delay

0:01

Hand Bias

x 24

Framers

0 - 0 1 - 0 2 - 21 3 - 14 4 - 316

Jumps

x 358

Hands

x 119

Quads

x 0

Color Jumps

x 8

Color Hands

x 0

Color Quads

x 0

Most notes in:

1/3 of a Second
10 - 30.00 nps 0.5 Seconds
14 - 28.00 nps 1 Second
24 - 24.00 nps 2 Seconds
44 - 22.00 nps 5 Seconds
92 - 18.40 nps 10 Seconds
175 - 17.50 nps 30 Seconds
484 - 16.13 nps 1 Minute
920 - 15.33 nps

Color Count

x 866 (36.23%)
x 701 (29.33%)
x 16 (0.67%)
x 545 (22.8%)
x 15 (0.63%)
x 73 (3.05%)
x 20 (0.84%)
x 62 (2.59%)
x 92 (3.85%)

Largest Note Gaps

0.47s0.47s0.47s0.47s0.47s0.47s0.47s0.47s
35
28
21
14
7

Note to judge: chorus disrupts all layering outside of vocals (and breaks for a 1/2 beat after every phrase) for difficulty balance - particularly interested in your thoughts on this.

You Don't Know (VisD) [5.0/10]
> Permission check good.
> Sync looks good (No changes necessary).
> No issues found within simfile properties.
> No issues found within submission folder contents.

-Intro is sorta repetitive pattern-wise, can definitely take advantage of Pitch Relevance here to change/utilize alternative columns to spice up this section.

-[00:21.258] Gonna straight up address the 64th utilization to vocals here. They are pretty much there for difficulty curbing, full stop. This is breakcore, there’s a lot happening instrumentally in the backgrounds here, but it kinda does the file injustice to ignore instruments specifically for vocals here and elsewhere in the file, and then inflate the difficulty of the vocals. I’m not saying it doesn’t work, in some sections like [00:23.808] and [00:35.208] they’re relatively tame and not much else is happening with them. But at [02:34.008] & [02:39.558], you are replacing full measures with this type of difficulty inflation specifically following vocal usage, and it plainly doesn’t fit the chart.

-[01:01.608] If you only do vocals for this section, why is this 4th a jump (drum+guitar, not vocals)? What about the 8th at [01:02.058] (only guitar, no drum or vocals)? No jump at 01:02.508? That is the same 4th jump as the introductory jump to this section at [00:57.708], and no associated jumps for those at [01:00.858 & 01:01.008], sections like these are pretty wildly inconsistent at what the jumps are going to, despite focus being specifically on vocals. If you’re swapping between the two when vocals are taking a break, there’s quite a few missing jumps here that need to be filled in.

-[01:04.795] If this 32nd is vocal emphasis, it should probably be removed.

-[01:07.008] Feels like there’s a pair of [12] jumps missing here given layering happening in this section so far.

-[01:08.808] Missing 4th jump (vocals).

-[01:11.020] Missing 32nd. (Same with 02:08.620)

-[01:16.908] These sections are good (outside the vocal dumping).

-[01:55.308] This section suffers most of the same issue that timestamp [01:01.608] does. (See: [02:00.108], [02:00.408], [02:05.208])

-[02:09.708] Section here is also fine (aside from vocal dumping).

-[02:36.108] Not sure what the 48ths in the right column are going to here?

-Needs quite a bit of work. Initially on first viewing I thought it’s probably just the vocal difficulty inflating at fault, but there’s some jump/pattern inconsistencies as well that vary from section to section.

An appeal was requested and the file was looked over by TC_Halogen, here are his notes:

-Intro is sorta repetitive pattern-wise, can definitely take advantage of Pitch Relevance here to change/utilize alternative columns to spice up this section.

While I understand the reasoning behind making this note, the issue with it is that it implies pointing to something in structure that is tonal, when what’s being followed is entirely atonal; it’s very clearly kicks on 1, snares on 4, and hi-hat alternations down the center. Repetition could be avoided by changing the patterning itself but pushing the structural motif towards pitch when it’s making a very deliberate choice to not follow isn’t a fair note to make.

-[00:21.258] Gonna straight up address the 64th utilization to vocals here. They are pretty much there for difficulty curbing, full stop. This is breakcore, there’s a lot happening instrumentally in the backgrounds here, but it kinda does the file injustice to ignore instruments specifically for vocals here and elsewhere in the file, and then inflate the difficulty of the vocals. I’m not saying it doesn’t work, in some sections like [00:23.808] and [00:35.208] they’re relatively tame and not much else is happening with them. But at [02:34.008] & [02:39.558], you are replacing full measures with this type of difficulty inflation specifically following vocal usage, and it plainly doesn’t fit the chart.

Whether or not it fits is a subjective decision: it has a very clear intent in what it is doing, and it’s not doing anything to really spike the difficulty beyond what’s already played throughout the file.

-[01:01.608] If you only do vocals for this section, why is this 4th a jump (drum+guitar, not vocals)? What about the 8th at [01:02.058] (only guitar, no drum or vocals)? No jump at 01:02.508? That is the same 4th jump as the introductory jump to this section at [00:57.708], and no associated jumps for those at [01:00.858 & 01:01.008], sections like these are pretty wildly inconsistent at what the jumps are going to, despite focus being specifically on vocals. If you’re swapping between the two when vocals are taking a break, there’s quite a few missing jumps here that need to be filled in.

Vocals are the primary focus of layering here; however, when the vocals are no longer playing, the chart leverages the power guitar to stack layering. There is a noticeable mistake at 1:02.958, where a jump is misplaced for the vocal (the couplet of jumps is an 8th early).

-[01:04.795] If this 32nd is vocal emphasis, it should probably be removed.
I do agree with this note, actually. There are other instances of 32nds that go to something tangible and makes this a bit more erroneous.

-[01:07.008] Feels like there’s a pair of [12] jumps missing here given layering happening in this section so far.
There’s no instances of kicks or anything to merit jumps here; the two jumps to start the very beginning of this section are a kick before this layering structure is defined, and a cymbal crash, which is appropriate.

-[01:08.808] Missing 4th jump (vocals).
This is correct.

-[01:11.020] Missing 32nd. (Same with 02:08.620)
This is also correct.

-[01:16.908] These sections are good (outside the vocal dumping).

-[01:55.308] This section suffers most of the same issue that timestamp [01:01.608] does. (See: [02:00.108], [02:00.408], [02:05.208])

-[02:09.708] Section here is also fine (aside from vocal dumping).

-[02:36.108] Not sure what the 48ths in the right column are going to here?
There’s a brief shout that’s given coloring here; if you give a look at the interval, it’s done specifically for that while also keeping it to five notes for a beat as well.

-Needs quite a bit of work. Initially on first viewing I thought it’s probably just the vocal difficulty inflating at fault, but there’s some jump/pattern inconsistencies as well that vary from section to section.

Very much disagree with the quite a bit of work notion here; this structure is pretty generally explicit and the issues are quite minor beyond subjective structural interpretations involving screams and a layering motif. Recommending this be changed from a rejected to accepted status.

Addressing AJ's notes:
There is a noticeable mistake at 1:02.958, where a jump is misplaced for the vocal (the couplet of jumps is an 8th early).

- Great catch, fixed

"-[01:04.795] If this 32nd is vocal emphasis, it should probably be removed.
I do agree with this note, actually. There are other instances of 32nds that go to something tangible and makes this a bit more erroneous."

- yah this is just carelessness lol

"-[01:08.808] Missing 4th jump (vocals).
This is correct."

- i'm really not hearing the vocals either of you hear here for some reason. I hear, from the 4th on 1.08.508 and at every 8th, "tell - you - (nothing) - what - (nothing) - you - "...the only thing on 1.08.808 is a clap which is not layered in this for reasons AJ has noted.

"-[01:11.020] Missing 32nd. (Same with 02:08.620)
This is also correct."

- this was initially omitted for difficulty concerns but numerous people have told me at this point the js is not nearly as hard as the other stuff, so i'm putting this back!!!

"-[02:36.108] Not sure what the 48ths in the right column are going to here?
There’s a brief shout that’s given coloring here;"

- Really happy you noticed this, AJ - yes the color here is for the extra little shout the singer does that cracks his voice at that moment. I'm just fond of it because it's an unusual form of color theory where instead of 192nds accenting regular-snap notes, regular-snap notes accent a stream of 192nds (since they are 20ths).

There's some other minor changes in there as well - this version is basically the MWC version + fixes noted above

A new chart file was uploaded with the following changes:
----------
Note Count changed: 2391 => 2392
AVG NPS changed: 13.93086 => 13.93669
Hand Bias changed: 25 => 26

A new chart file was uploaded with the following changes:
----------
Note Count changed: 2392 => 2390
AVG NPS changed: 13.93669 => 13.92503
Hand Bias changed: 26 => 24