99.9 (Eurobeat Remix) :: FFR Batch Submission
DarkZtar -
99.9 (Eurobeat Remix) -
Turbo [9 / 10]
Dump Batch
PublicEvents
Released
- The sim folder name isn't as expected: "99.9 [Eurobeat Remix] (DarkZtar)" vs "99.9 (Eurobeat Remix) (DarkZtar)"
✔️ This chart has been marked as final and shouldn't receive any more changes.
Simfile Folder Name
99.9 [Eurobeat Remix] (DarkZtar)
Note Count
2629
Chart Length
2:20
Average NPS
19.5999
Estimated Difficulty
102.19
First Note
0:05
Ending Note Delay
0:01
Hand Bias
Framers
0 - 0
1 - 0
2 - 32
3 - 202
4 - 479
Jumps
Hands
Quads
Color Jumps
Color Hands
Color Quads
Most notes in:
1/3 of a Second
10 - 30.00 nps
0.5 Seconds
13 - 26.00 nps
1 Second
25 - 25.00 nps
2 Seconds
50 - 25.00 nps
5 Seconds
115 - 23.00 nps
10 Seconds
228 - 22.80 nps
30 Seconds
643 - 21.43 nps
1 Minute
1204 - 20.07 nps
Color Count
Largest Note Gaps
0.53s0.37s0.37s0.37s0.33s0.33s0.3s0.27s
Posted at 12:58am on November 1st, 2022
Accept, but I'm a bit torn between FR and accept. I think there's a lot going on in this chart and a lot of which I think is really interesting and neat, but there are some things that I'm iffy on that I would like some clarification on. The reviews in this batch are meant to be short so I apologise for the longer comment, but the chart definitely has appeal and I have some (smallish) reservations with this.
In particular, I'm not super sure of how you layer/pattern some of the vocals here, particularly in the hook and chorus. More specifically:
6.534 to 6.887/etc. - You use a 24th rhythm from 6.534 to 6.711, which makes sense in this context, but you omit the 24th rhythm from 6.711 to 6.887. I know that the second syllable is followed with a jump, but the missing 24th rhythm feels a bit jarring given that the second syllable is as strong as the first syllable. I'd make 6.711-6.887 24ths in some way. I have similar reservations with syllables like 7.593 to 7.946, I think 24ths could work with them in some way.
I understand that in later parts of the song you use 32nds for syllables like 6.534-6.711 though (so maybe the first hook should be 32nds too, not sure), and maybe that's why you omitted an additional 24th rhythm here, but I'd still try to put a 24th rhythm in the parts I mentioned if possible.
7.946 to 8.299 - There should be 4-note 32nd bursts at 7.946 and 8.299, consistent with what you did afterwards. -- 8.123 I think is better represented with a chord or a grace note rather than a 4-note burst.
57.358 to 58.064/etc. - This plays like one continuous 24th staircase jumpstream because of how it's constructed, and it's really hard to feel out the specific syllables here because of how it's patterned. Given that you manipulate this 32nd pattern throughout the chorus effectively with split rolls, I don't think you can change this very much, but I personally would like a less homogeneous base pattern for the 32nds.
Outside of that, 1:31.417 to 1:35.829 feels a touch overemphasised to me because the only backing instrumentation here is the synth, so I'd suggest removing the dumpy elements here, but it's a minor issue.
The rest seems sound and interesting overall. I don't think there's enough here to justify an FR and most of this seems subjective on my end, but I'd definitely like some clarification or changes regardless.
Posted at 8:06pm on November 2nd, 2022
REJECT.
The relevance of the 24ths is lost in a good amount of sections when trying to distinguish between what sounds they go to.
For example, at 9.711 there are rising synth notes until about 10.064 but then the 24ths continue and even the 32nds after that. While I assume that maybe these are abstract charting of the (pretty blurred) vocals, they just conflict with the 8ths jumps layering. The same can be seen at 15.711 where the very prominent synth and drum are completely lost in the 24ths/32nds.
Other examples would be 36.005 where there's a long syllable lasting two 8ths, but it's charted as just one 8th worth of 24ths. The following 24ths at 36.358 then feel out of place because the next big syllable. There's also 1.33:182 where the "sa tis fac tion" is just missing the "tion" to transition abruptly to the 16ths minijacks, yet 1:39.182 is layered.
The minijacks starting at 28.770 are a bit confusing since the crisp hi-hats do some minijacks too but that's not what the chart is following with its abstract layering. That creates a pretty conflicting rhythm.
This is just too hard to follow, would need to review the relevance of the abstract charting and maybe resort to more conventional charting for some sections/layering.
Posted at 3:59pm on November 29th, 2022
Accept--though more edits could be made here.
File takes a pretty vanilla, albeit, a little outdated approach; at least relative to the Etterna meta with the alternating 16th-24th-32nd rhythms in service of the vocals--but, overall, everything is well thought out and it plays nice.
I agree with April that there are some sections where you might have wanted to followed your vocal-intensity logic a little bit better. Even in a section like 39.711 secs this is the most intense of those three vocal bursts to change it to a 24th even if you decided on 24ths for the next measure feels a bit off.
Clarification and/or justification of the points mentioned by April or myself would be nice but not necessary for me.
Posted at 11:08am on November 30th, 2022
Matthias also reviewed this file and deemed this acceptable.
3 Accept / 1 Reject
Moving to Accept
Thank you for your submission to the dump batch! Don't forget dump files can also be sent/resubmitted to any regular batch.
Posted at 9:59pm on January 16th, 2023
Gonna move this along as-is due to Accepted rating, despite no acknowledgement of notes or fixes. If you have a fix, contact me directly so I can apply it for Difficulty Consultants.
Posted at 12:46pm on January 21st, 2023
minor consistency fixes.
A new chart file was uploaded with the following changes:
----------
Note Count changed: 2633 => 2629
AVG NPS changed: 19.62972 => 19.5999
Hand Bias changed: 7 => 9