TC_Halogen - 7.5/10
- off set (hahahaksljdhfjklhkjhd) is good
- 5.268: this looks a little on the messier side compared to what’s being accented
- 13.105: missing a couple of notes after the 4th based on what was just accounted for in the burst that just passed?
- 15.882: this jump could probably be removed
- 20.289: missing jump?
- 40.043: feel like this jump should either be removed or at the least changed off of the UL since it’s sharing the same jump as the previous accent
- 42.655: oof, this mini one-hand trill is gross
- 53.104: this burst is a little heavy on the right-hand there, might be worth a slight rework
- 1:16.287: having to execute this pattern right after the two [LR] 16th jumps is absolutely brutal, might be worth making this pattern a bit easier to maintain the accent and improve playability
- 1:35.886: this recurring pattern is extremely difficult, there’s a little bit too much left-handed tension on it
- 1:42.818: this minijack feels misplaced by a 16th
- 1:48.946: the 32nd jumptrill is acceptable, but having to do a 48th flam a 32nd note later is a bit much
- 2:10.004: some missing 32nds here
- 2:11.311: not a fan of the start of this burst sequence; the separation at the tail end is a good accent, though
- 2:11.926: move to U
- 2:21.273: jump here feels a bit out of place as well
- 2:21.885/etc: missing 32nds for the reversed percussion
- 2:24.213/2:31.396: I like the idea of a semi-redundant burst, but the particular pattern choice is quite rough
- 2:34.821/2:42.003/etc: when playing this at 100% speed, the sounds seem to have a more strongly noticeable separation which might give a bit more ability to break things apart and give it a more distinct feel
- 2:56.536: missing jump?
- 3:03.558: jesus that’s a hard burst
- 3:21.798/etc: missing 32nd; check around to catch any others, because there are a few subtle ones that could be added to the structure
- 3:48.638/3:59.087/etc: accurate, but not particularly a fan of these more abrupt and violent bursts given that the song is in a bit of a winding down period
- chart is very structurally sound as a whole, even at the exceptional difficulty presented
- some cleanup in transitions could improve the overall palatability of it, but this is definitely worthy of being in FFR’s hardest files for sure

Wiosna - 8/10
5.268/5.595 - the [34] double here seems a bit too aggressive given your layering scheme i think
12.615 - would personally continue using grace notes here because the sound that you're following for that is more prominent but i understand why you did it. 12.778 also feels a tiny bit too hard but i'll have to delegate to others because it might just be a me thing.

really nice burst differentiation with the use of minitrills and rolls in general.

15.554 - this is a bit nasty to hit especially given the 64th buzz before it. there's definitely some justification here but i personally would prefer a xx-x burst rather than a xxxx 48th burst here.
19.966 - shouldn't be a double?
20.779 - can afford to have a burst here
21.104 - burst here can be a little bit trillier for sure given the timbre present
21.431 - i think this should create a minijack with the note after? not sure
21.591 - personal preference but i think the first 4 notes of 32nds should be the trilly part rather than the last 4 given the sound here, but i'll leave it up to you
25.267 - should be a double
28.453 - this is really hard though i respect the fact that you made the transition as easy as possible. i'd personally prefer if this were a straight 32nd burst instead though
30.820 - this shouldn't create an 8th minijack with the 16th
31.882 - this should create a minijack with the 16th after; the 16th shouldn't be connected to the 4th
32.233 - wouldn't include this 32nd here, it's very faint
35.716 - should be a double
37.106 - refer to 30.820
37.430 - i'd personally make this a rolly burst rather than creating some minitrills because of how light this sound is
42.655 - this burst is pretty excessive
44.125 - shouldn't be a double
44.534/45.187/etc. - feels a bit excessive given that the 32nd burst right after has a more pronounced sound and is actually easier to hit than the pattern before it. you can either omit this 32nd burst entirely, or make the first burst easier (no minijacks) and the second burst harder
47.880 - would personally prefer this burst to be a roll because of the timbre
53.104 - this burst feels a lot on the excessive side. i can hear the hi-hats for the first set of 4 32nds and some other set for the next set of 4, but i don't think that the burst ultimately works because it's so hard to hit given how soft the sound is
1:04.737 - feels like there's some way of making sure that this minijack is not on the same column as the minijack before it
1:16.287 - you can make this set of 4 notes a 32nd rolly pattern (3421) i think, this is a pretty rough pattern as is
1:22.083 - this 32nd burst can be a bit harder because of the hi-hats, maybe 23[14]?
1:22.736 - missing double; this seems intentional but i don't think that it's necessary
1:25.635 - refer to 1:04.737
1:30.492 - should be a double
1:32.533 - i think this burst shouldn't be 231 because it's the same motion as 1:32.270 and the hi-hats here are quite different from the ones before it, plus i don't think that there's a need to continue the OH trill here
1:35.968 - this anchor is pretty rough aha, would try to find a way to make the last 2 notes of the anchor on a different column compared to the rest at least
1:40.942/1:41.106 - missing doubles?
1:49.926 - missing a lot of doubles here for the snares, this repeats a fair amount
1:53.270 - can't really hear the 32nds here. there might be some really soft hi-hats but i don't think that they're worth layering given the other background noises going on
2:03.966/2:04.130 - missing doubles?
2:05.110 - missing double

there seems to be a decent bunch of missing doubles in this section. i'm not sure if you're layering doubles to snares here, but if you aren't, disregard me. I won’t be mentioning many layering concerns from now on

2:10.004 - should be a 32nd burst
2:10.739 - burst here is a little bit harsh, you can make this a 32nd burst and it wouldn't be too much of a problem i think.
2:11.311 - would like this 7-note 64th burst in particular nerfed, but the rest of the burst is fine and i like it a lot
2:11.926 - i don't think it's necessary to make a minijack connected to the 32nd after here
2:24.313/2:31.396 - burst here should be a bit more generously patterned i think, the sound here is quite faint so i think more rolly patterns would work instead
2:27.939/etc. - i'd personally like the bursts here to be slightly shorter (sets of 3) because i don't think the wobbles here are long enough to justify a continuous 32nd stream, but that might just be me
2:55.309 - can't really hear the 32nds here
3:03.719 - not sure if the jump is necessary here, this burst is pretty hard as is for a relatively soft sound
3:08.371 - should create a minijack with the 8th before it
4:19.135/4:30.435 - ouch

last minute and a half is excellent.

Almost all of the points I’ve pointed out are minor in the grand scheme of things; I really like this chart for the most part. You did a great job keeping a clean structure and did some really nice patterning for the bursts whenever necessary.

The only reason I’m not giving a higher rating than this is because of all of those minor things and the double usage. I do feel that I’m missing something in terms of how you’re using doubles, because there are a lot of snares in the song that I felt could be layered as doubles, but you didn’t. I can tell that there are some occasions where you intentionally omitted layering snares (e.g. 3:00.287 and other similar-sounding sections), but there are many other spots where you could’ve layered snares but didn’t. I don’t think that layering doubles to snares more frequently would contribute to the chart being that much harder either. That said, the chart is definitely not rejectable despite all of these points (and, if anything, the “critiques” are just more notable than for others because the chart is already quite cleanly structured), and this doesn’t feel like 5 minutes at all. The chart has very few unfair spots as well, which is a great plus. Well done.