[EzExZeRo7497]

Originally Posted by TC_Halogen

Ubiquity {Stellabee} (EzExZeRo7497)
Rating: 8.5/10
- 15.174/etc: not entirely sure why only two of these are jumps and not all four (or none)
- 28.805 to 37.396: these patterns could use a bit more in the way of variance
- the choice of anchoring the kicks to one of the two notes for the jump that accommodates for the snare was a really nice choice that keeps the layering tastefully light and as a result, the chart is super fluent - definitely a fan
- 1:23.623: this is actually the only instance in this section of the song where the crash cymbal doesn’t take a slight upward increase in pitch, so it might be more relevant to keep this as a triple
- really good chart - it’s almost rudimentary in structure, but that’s what makes it work so well - it’s simple, to the point, and very effective in delivery/accenting

15.174: I alternated between doubles and singles because of timbre -- the sounds are too airy despite being prominent. I didn't think that those sounds were as shrill as snares (let alone bass kicks), so I thought that using doubles would've been too heavy. Singles would've been too light given that they're more salient sounds than hi-hats. The same logic applies to a lot of the offset notes in the chart.

28.805 - 37:396: My previous version had [14][23][14] and [23][14][23] jumptrills instead of [12][34][12] jumptrills, but I thought against using those patterns because it created too much of a difficulty spike given the intensity of the section. Using non-[12] or [34] doubles outside of the jumptrills cause the same issue (arguably more so), unfortunately.

1:23.623: I alternated between triples and doubles not because of pitch but because of timbre. I used consecutive triples in the first half of the chart because the sounds that go to those chords were particularly strong (heavy bass kick + cymbal crashes), but there were no bass kicks complementing the cymbal crashes in the second half of the song.

Thanks for the strong accept.