Etterna Charting Contest 2020 Part 2 - Voting Thread

The time is here, voting has begun.

Below you will find the groups and a zip file containing all submissions for that group, I have also provided a zip of all groups if you prefer.

You may not vote on any file in your own group.
If you are going to critique files in comments, keep it polite and constructive.
Votes are hidden until the voting process ends, but I can see who voted for what - so don’t try to vote for your own file or mass vote another person with ill intention.


  • 1
  • 2

0 voters


  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6

0 voters

Dr. Sebagh

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6

0 voters


  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

0 voters

Overwatch Theme Remix

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4

0 voters


  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6

0 voters

Here is the link to ALL groups in a single zip for your convenience.

Voting will end in 1 week.

Have fun playing the charts and voting, I look forward to the results!


Thread’s been up for 14 minutes and we already have a bunch of votes :thinking:

It’s almost like people are waiting to vote after the stream.


gl group 3


Can’t really tell people what to do, but shouldn’t you at least play the songs before you cast your vote?

it’s also possible some files might be too hard for people so they’d rather watch a vod, but eh. its not like theres money on the table.
gl to everyone!!

Reviews for Rainshower:

  1. Pretty heavy layering, but otherwise fairly well balanced and kind of consistent. Not my personal cup of tea but not bad. 7/10

  2. Some parts are done really well, like the quad/mine section. Unfortunately, while I understand the intention of the 24ths on the wubs, the layering was extremely dense and spiked hard compared to the rest of the file. Overall, there were some nice tricks here and there, but it wasn’t as clean as it could have been, due to things like difficulty spikes and minihold usage. 6.5/10

Overall, choosing which one comes out on top is difficult, it could be close. 2 has a lot of cute moments and takes more risks, and is significantly better from a musical approach in certain sections, but 1 is overall just a cleaner, balanced execution. It’s hard to tell which one will win in this category, but 1 barely edges out as my personal choice because the execution is a bit more well-rounded. It’s hard to pick because they’re not easily comparable.


Reviews for Headspace:

  1. Overall, way too many miniholds. It makes most of the file not very punchy or not very satisfying to land some of the big hits. There are also some questionable spikes like the 32nd stream. There are some redeeming qualities though, like the jack section or the roll rhythms. 7/10

  2. Quads seem a little overdone. Rhythms and patterns are a little sloppy, and I’m not sold on the roll usage. The rest of the file was just littered with questionable ghost notes, and it doesn’t really feel like it’s following the song musically, it just feels like it’s trying to cram notes in. The few places that actually feel okay to play are actually the slower sections. The mine thing at the end is really cool though, but it doesn’t change the fact that the whole thing feels exhausting to play. 3.5/10

  3. Color theory is excellent, makes the song actually feel colorful and vibrant. There’s lots of cool effects with the long holds, flams, and mines. Tension is added and released properly. There’s artistic liberty taken with the rhythms but you can still clearly feel what everything is going to. There’s pattern/motif discipline throughout. Although structurally it’s a little bit of a mess and kind of sloppy, the overall feel of it is dead on. It takes a lot of exciting risks and they all work. The artist clearly has a good ear, because he/she picked up on a lot of small details throughout. 8.5/10

  4. Not bad by any means, but it feels a tad safe. There isn’t a lot of high impact patterning, partially due to the increased usage of “flowing” patterns (like 1234321) and few hand-alternating patterns (like 1324231), as well as lack of triples and quads. Structurally seems to lack the right amount of tension/density in certain places, but it flows well and its structured decently. 7/10

  5. Roll usage is kind of cute, but the difficulty spike at the end is kind of extreme, there are some questionable mine placements, and the chart doesn’t take too many risks otherwise. It’s not particularly palatable, and kind of tiring to play. 5/10

  6. There are a couple of significant spikes here and there, and a few specific places the flow is a little odd or awkward, but overall it takes a lot of risks in regards to rhythmic variation, and generally speaking succeeds in making interesting unique patterns. Couple of cute rolls in there, and I’m talking about both the long thing and the pattern. 7.5/10

I think I can comfortably say that 3 is the best, simply because it demonstrates a perceptive ear, takes huge risks and is still executed well, with great flow and tension control.


I’ll toss in my thoughts that if you only saw the stream, I recommend playing the charts as well because my opinion flipped on pretty much all of them after doing so lol
Lotta good stuff in Headspace and Rock a Doodle Doo. If I get top 3 this time I’ll be surprised!


didn’t mention it in my last message cause im retard(retard) but good luck to everyone in the contest

Reviews for Rock-a-doodle-doo:

  1. Flourishes are cute, turntable scratches feel slick, fat chords and guitar handling, quad holds, all really nice cool techniques. Also happy you chose to follow the piano solo. However, the rolls are a bit much, the jack patterning doesn’t respect the relationship of columns relative to your hands, and some parts you got a bit lazy. It’s got a lot of potential but falls flat in some major ways. 6.5/10

  2. You could clearly hear some of the details, like the bass guitar, but for some reason never really fully choose to follow a specific instrument. The droning 16ths make it difficult to figure out what you’re trying to follow at any given point in the song. There is an attempt at jack theory too, but it doesn’t reflect the percussion groove. This ends up feeling homogeneous and uninspired. 5/10

  3. There is so much potential in this, simply because of the jack theory. You have fleeting moments of brilliance in using jack theory to reflect the percussion groove, but the rest of the chart is just marred with sloppiness. You clearly can find plenty of sounds and techniques to work with, yet you chose to throw in a significant number of ghost notes and weird hold notes. It isn’t too taxing to play but it still feels like it’s filled with mistakes. 6/10

  4. Biggest criticism is that there are way too many hold notes. You don’t need to place hold notes on every vocal note, we can tell what you’re following there, and that many hold notes is not only distracting but then discourages you from putting notes behind them, thus restricting your jack usage. There is a distinct lack of jack theory throughout, as it makes the 16ths kind of drone on without following the music too well, especially given the expectation you set in the very notes of the chart. The hypersynced rhythms thrown in also don’t help, as in the midst of the 16ths they just feel like a nebulous glob of polyrhythmic notes. Execution of concepts are therefore not very clean, but you did stick to form and there are some cute moments in there, like the three triple holds in a row. 6.5/10

  5. Dense and sloppy, with a ton of ghost notes. You do mellow out later on, but it’s still problematic. Shows some general musical sense however, but the difficulty still feels oddly inappropriate for the song. 5.5/10

  6. Even more dense than 5, but demonstrates less musicality. Hard to even make constructive comments beyond this, and even the parts that could have been really good are hard to make out because of how much clutter is in the sections around them. My recommendation is to reduce the clutter on ghost notes, and try to make something that is more focused. You don’t need to feel like you have to cram everything into a chart. By leaving some space for your patterns to breathe, it will be easier for the player to figure out what is going on. 4/10

  7. Mines are a little tight, respectable attempt at jack theory, although a couple of places are ghosted. Really like the cute [34] motif later on, works really well. Beyond that, it has an okay groove but feels a tad monotonous. Would help if you redirected your focus in various other parts of the song. However, it is one of the cleanest entries. 7/10

A couple of close entries in this group, but I would still put 7 ahead on top since it’s just overall clean and has mostly the right feel to make up for a lot of its lack of risk-taking.

Don’t forget to rate group 3, Cosmo. ; )

1 Like

Reviews for Overwatch Theme:

  1. A good attempt, but I’m sure even you will agree that while making this, the long holds really restricted a lot of your pattern choices. Thing is, you don’t have to use as many long holds as you think :wink: Unfortunately, the choice to use all those long holds took away a lot of the potential to make this more fun, but I will respect that you kept the patterns simple as to not break flow. 6.5/10

  2. Hold usage is bland and uninteresting, feels like you’re using it to just fill in space rather than using it functionally. The patterns are generally either uninspired or annoying to hit, there’s very little consistency in the methodology. There are also only like 3 Xmod gimmicks, one of which works very well, but the other two are basically not possible to sightread. 5/10

  3. The use of long holds in the beginning is a bit sloppy, not sure how I feel about using ghost note rolls. There is a respectable attempt at using jack theory here, and a lot of it does work because it’s mostly literal. Could be really good if it was just cleaned up. 7/10

  4. I do respect that you tried to avoid 16ths as much as possible so you can feel the 8ths. Unfortunately, which 16ths you removed feels pretty random and arbitrary, leaving a lot of weird flow gaps. There are also long holds with notes around them, which feel kinda tacky to hit. You do seem to know what common pitfalls to avoid, but as a consequence you left yourself not doing anything particularly noteworthy either. My recommendation is to be a bit more constructive in your planning and how to handle different layering concepts and pay more close attention to details in percussion, so you don’t find yourself trying to improvise on the fly when you have a conflict. 6/10

I feel dirty selecting 3 as my top pick, because of the sheer amount of ghost rolls, but it provides the most interesting experience compared to the other entries as a whole. 1 comes out barely in second simply because it’s a clean execution compared to the others, being very well structured with good flow and few technical errors. I’m not sure the community will agree with me on this though, as 4 has a bit more interesting variety to offer, so it could come out ahead.

1 Like

I got linked this and looked through most of these, and didn’t play any - mostly because I feel looking at a file is a bit more productive to me than if I enjoyed playing it.

My votes were:


(In order.)

The reason for the none is that I feel no chart really works with the song and they all feel under-polished and like a rough draft. Or in short really - I didn’t like either of them. If I had to though, I’d likely go with 2? It’s a bit of a rough sell though.

Would also like to note that with Rainshower, I’d love to see those two middle ground the ideas they had, because I feel the perfect chart is there if you were to take pieces of each execution and mash them together.

1 Like

hey heres my 2 cents on rainshower, overall both files exuded quite a bit of S O U L that made it a difficult pick i think, though i am probably biased since i’m not only a sucker for gluts and polys, but the song is pretty gr8 as well !

i preferred the single lane mines in rainshower 1’s intro; using the density of the mines to represent the rising and falling of the ambient noise worked well

in the next section, it struck me as odd that RS2 did not opt to dump this part, since it would be more consistent with how later sections were stepped. I think RS1 stepped this part better, using 24ths for that shrill noise or however you call it; though to be fair, i can see how it’d be hard to step this section satisfyingly

interesting differences between the wubs section in both entries, RS1 opting to emphasize the percussion a bit more with hands and glutty patterning, whereas RS2 put more attention to the wubs with 24th bursts and some fun lil polys, using only single note jacks for the percussion instead. RS1 did highlight the wubs with the holds though, which was very naisu!

i liked both approaches to this section quite a fr*cken bit, but i think RS1 works better when put in context with the rest of the file. i love the poly stuff in RS2 but it’s a bit spiky and places the meat of the file awkwardly in the middle; RS1 has a more consistent difficulty curve throughout

skipping ahead to the climax part with the saxophone since i am lazy. i liked RS1 better in this part - even though it omitted layering of the saxophone as miniholds like RS2, it felt pretty elegant in its simplicity. honestly thought RS1 climax was a bit generic at first glance, but then i noticed how cleanly structured it was and it felt g00d tbh

RS2’s climax felt weird in its placement of some holds and minijacks; couldn’t quite tell what some of them were going to. also, there seemed to be a copious amount of split jumptrills here, which felt less preferable to RS1 which used split jumptrills more sparingly

as a bonus, there were some wubs in RS2 that were stepped as 48th graces, which was p cool and a bit more intredasting than how RS1 handled it

may write thoughts on headspace entries later ok thank bye!


Reviews for NULCTRL:

  1. The beginning put my expectations so high, the way the 8th anchors were staggered was soooooo smooth. Then came the huge amounts of dense ghost notes. Although some of it is cute, a majority of it is just way too dense to make sense of, making it quite tiring to play. The worst part has to be the betrayal of expectations in the beginning. I’m pretty sure without the ghost notes this would have been excellent. 4/10

  2. Generally clean, simple patterns. Mostly consistent in form and structure too, with minor nitpicks about flow. Doesn’t take a lot of risks though. 7/10

  3. There are lots of ghost 16ths in the beginning. It’s a good attempt and I can understand what you’re going for, but the 24th rolls for the wub sounds don’t seem to fit very well. From a musical standpoint, the note density doesn’t properly reflect the tension in the song. More intense parts of the song don’t feel harder, the calmer parts don’t feel easier. The 24ths are also the only difficulty spikes in the entire chart, which makes the decision to use them even more strange. The first 16th stream into the drop is hella cool though. 6/10

  4. The big punchy patterns are cool, but don’t forget that some sounds are lifts and not hits! Structurally consistent, and although a lot of the effects are acknowledged, the patterns used for them feel way too safe. Some mines are a little bit tight, some rhythms are significantly offsync. 6.5/10

  5. There’s a lot of ghost notes to follow the wub sounds in order to artificially boost the difficulty. The density is insanely high, though it does roughly follow the intensity of the song, it is very taxing to play. Some of the patterns feel very sloppy, really hard to hit. 3.5/10

  6. Holy crap that’s a lot of ghost notes. Too dense for the song, because it adds a ton of notes where there should be silence, breaking the back and forth tension in the drop. It ruins the musicality of the song because the music has quite the dynamic range, but the notes just drone onwards as a giant dense mass. 3/10

2 and 4 are the top contenders in this group for sure, with 3 falling a bit short because it’s not as clean of an execution. 2 and 4 both feel pretty safe, 4 more so. Some parts 2 does better, some parts 4 does better, so it could be a toss-up here. To me, 4 felt a bit more intense, while 2 had some slightly more clever ideas in places and better technical accuracy. Given that criteria, I slightly prefer 2 over 4.

1 Like

Rainshower 1 - Really heavy chart, much harder than I anticipated for a song like this. The intro has great mine use and breaks the monotony of the section quite a bit, though I think a tiny tiny bit more pattern variety (in terms of notes) there wouldn’t hurt too much. The difficulty seems very heavily loaded towards the second third of the chart, and I don’t think it’s justifiably done so. The first drumstep section had decent repetition, though I personally found the 32nd bursts to be pretty gratuitous in general, especially given the sound that it was corresponding to. Not using 32nd bursts in the second half of the first drop section was an odd choice to me as well since it felt like a natural progression from the part after.

The 24th and 32nd bursts, in general, do make sense in that there are sounds that justify them, but I also feel that they’re heavy-handed. That isn’t necessarily bad in itself, but there are also many potential bass wobbles (and even the saxophones in the second half) that could’ve been layered to make the difficulty curve of this a bit flatter (and more congruent with the song).

Stopping the chart at the point at you did was tasteful and easily the right decision.

Rainshower 2 - Good intro like RS1; I think I like this intro more because the mines are a lot more scatter-brained compared to RS1’s. Great use of repetition for basically the entire first half of the chart. I particularly loved the 24th burst motif that was going on, though I think the first half of each burst can be 20ths instead and the bursts should be a bit longer than they currently are. The minijack collisions (e.g. 3[13]) are excellent, and the chart progression in the first half was very good. I generally liked the hold usage throughout most of the chart as well since it emphasised some of the most pronounced parts of the song, though I think some of the holds border a bit on gratuitous at points.

There are a handful of notable technical errors though: some of the 16th grace jacks aren’t exactly consecutive 16ths, there are a few minijacks in the saxophone section that are missing, and I think the saxophone can be followed a bit more precisely. The chart is also front-loaded, and I think the saxophone section is a bit oddly layered (though I assume that it’s more or less correct, it’s just hard to pick out what’s going on) though not a deal-breaker. Not stopping at where RS1 did definitely made the chart quite a bit given that there’s not much of substance left in the song. Chart is decent overall regardless.

RS1 has fewer egregious technical errors overall, but I personally prefer RS2 because of how much better it corresponds to the song on a macro level. RS1 felt a bit too heavy, and I feel that certain integral parts of the song aren’t quite being represented explicitly enough for my tastes. Both charts showed competence regardless and I believe that both charts can pick up from each other in various ways.

1 Like

Headspace 1 - I generally like the minihold use here, though it does border on gratuitous. The first drop section could’ve very easily afforded some toning down: some of those bursts are extremely difficult to hit and are much harder than the rest of the chart. There are some wubs that would’ve afforded more than just one note as well given how long they are as well.

The jack sections are fairly strong (good repetition and good use of PR), but I think a lot of the stream sections, especially in the second half, are far more overkill than not, even if it’s done to ensure a proper difficulty curve. The rest of the chart is pedestrian but effective albeit with some small technical errors here and there.

Headspace 2 - Very overemphasised in many sections, and I think the chart is extremely imprecise when it comes to accenting some of the most notable parts of the song in general. The chart somewhat makes sense on a very very broad level (and even then there are many sections that are very overdone relative to the intensity of a certain section), but I believe that songs like this can afford much finer accenting than what is currently presented here. Can definitely afford a much lighter approach in general in my opinion.

Headspace 3 - Excellent intro transitioning from 1/4 BPM and using mines+singles for bass kicks to 1/1 BPM and offset notes for bass kicks. There are some notes in the intro that are a tad bit overemphasised as doubles but I can personally see it as a way of just emphasising certain notes in a phrase. First drop section is a bit on the hard side and is a bit spiky compared to the rest of the chart, but there was some notable effort to tone it down as it is. Colour theory is spot-on in both accenting and differentiating various sections of the song, PR is strong for the integral sections of the chart, layering is more or less rock solid and easy to follow, and this has an excellent cut capturing both integral sections of the song without losing much.

There are numerous small technical errors littered throughout with some doubles that should be singles (and some triples that can be doubles), some bass wobbles not being layered ideally, certain bursts that can be ascending, some bass kicks having the same chords as snares at points, some odd rollds, and missing holds, but the chart’s ideas are executed very well, and the meat of the chart is pronounced and extremely effective. The primary issue with the chart might be the fact that the first drop section can be polished a tiny bit more. Great chart, would be excellent if it were a bit less sloppy.

Headspace 4 - The chart’s layering is mostly there (though I find the intro to be a bit overdone in general, not offensively overdone though), it’s mostly the patterning that I believe is a bit alien to me. I’d want to say that the person who made this isn’t quite familiar with making charts at this difficulty (probably makes files that are easier than this?), since there are a lot of odd staircase patterns for 16th bursts and many unconventionally long anchors in the continuous 16th runs. The chart also seems quite toned down to the chart’s potential detriment as well since there isn’t any accent for some of these bits (snare rolls, some continuous bass wobbles) that are toned down.

The chart more or less plays fine, though I feel that there are many small sections that end up being underwhelming to play overall because of how excessively prudent it is.

Headspace 5 - Some fairly clear pattern regimentation for consecutive snares, which I thought was neat as a percussionhead. Mine usage seems a bit spotty and potentially quite intrusive in some sections. Chart is pedestrian for the first half barring a few 32nd rolls ending on difficult doubles (i.e. not [12] or [34])… but the second half is about 3-4x harder than the rest of the chart. There’s definitely some attempt to follow the song with the 32nd rolls here, but they’re still much much harder than the rest of the chart. It might work for something like 2012 FFR, but spikes like this are far more frowned upon today. The rest of the chart is serviceable, though I feel that it’s a bit underwhelming for my tastes.

Headspace 6 - Very easily geared towards higher-level players given the far more aggressive layering approach. The second half of the intro I feel could’ve had more emphasis on the melodic instrument rather than the percussion, and I think the bass wobble section is a tad bit underwhelming with a lack of flams or 3+ note bursts for longer bass wobbles. The bursts can be a fair bit more nuanced in terms of burst speeds + patterning as well I feel. The first minijack section is decent, though again, I think some of the bursts don’t correspond too well with the song (might be because the bursts are too continuous?) in that section.

The chart’s last section seems disproportionately difficult compared to the song itself, though it’s clear what the minijacks are going to on a macro level. Cut is very underwhelming, but it seems to be a trend with recent charting where only one chorus section is charted instead of two. The chart has neat ideas overall, and despite my critiques of the chart, it generally works on a macro level. However, I feel that finer execution would’ve made this much nicer.

Headspace 3 is the clear winner for me here I think. The chart is definitely a lot easier than many of the other charts for Headspace, but I also feel that it best captures the song not only aural-kinesthetically but also aural-visually. It’s a general joy to play through with how much detail is being covered in a way that isn’t necessarily restricted to patterning, despite all of its minor technical errors. If anything, I feel that the fact that the concepts are so clear and well-executed makes the small technical errors just easier to pick out than the others.

That said, I think each person has their styles written on their sleeves even if I don’t know their charts very well. In that sense I do think that, even if I’m not the most fond of some of the charts in the list, I think their styles very much bleed through, which might be a good thing for certain people. I personally love seeing all of these different approaches because people’s styles generally diverge from each other.

1 Like

Reviews, day 1
[Two charts from each group each day, grade from F to S with X for N/A, four categories: tech/execution. variety/novelty, flow, potential]

Rainshower #1

Tech: S
It’s charted really well and I haven’t noticed any errors in it. The pattern choice is correct with only one somewhat questionable segment: minijacks at 1:30. The “tap-jump-hand” works super well.

Variety: A
Though the pattern choice is correct, the pattern choice is somewhat limited. It’s very consistent though. The biggest disappointment is the intro though: straight 24th rolls is kind of boring and the mine usage is a bit too bland.

Flow: A
My left hand cried playing this.

Potential: A
The chart requires only the intro to be improved really to be perfect.

Overall: 25 / 28.

Rainshower #2

Tech: S
No questions asked.

Variety: S
This chart’s intro destroys RS1. The patterns are also way more fun to play. The only thing that kinda stinks was the straight quad with a hold and mines in between. That sounds changes intensity, but it’s not really reflected in any way. But, this is offset by the rest of the chart.

Flow: S
Absolutely beautiful. The only segment that threw me off were the 48th flams. They are quite tricky to hit correctly.

Potential: S
The chart is as good as it gets.

Overall: 28/28 and a favorite chart from the contest.

Dr. Sebagh #1

Tech: B
Some bursts are too long and there is one that felt really off when I played it.

Variety: A
It’s fairly varied in pattern choice, not much to say.

Flow: B
Several flow breaking segments and the difficulty is fairly uneven. The intro felt really good, but the rest of the chart… not so much. Also what the fuck are these trills in the second half?

Potential: C
You’d have to revamp half the chart for it to become really good.

Overall: 20/28
It underdelivered from my hype for it on stream.

Dr. Sebagh #2

Tech: D
Nice fucking difficulty curve man. Holy shit. 22 my ass. The spikes are insane.
It starts off with graces that make no sense.
Why did you change trills for rolls during the “Dr. SEBAAAAAAGH” scream?
It is also incredibly inconsistent in representing sustained voice. Sometimes it’s a hand and sometimes it’s a 24th miniroll. Why?
Bro, fuck the dense handstream segment, jesus fuck.
What the fuck is this unplayable polyjack at 1:48?

Variety: A
Well, it had variety, I’ll give you that. It’s not executed well, but it had it.

Flow: X
I can’t grade this.

Potential: F
Sorry, this needs to be redone from scratch pretty much.

Overall: 10/21 -> 13/28

Rock-a-doodle-doo #1

Tech: B
Not sure why you decided to chart just the piano and not the insturment that’s way more funky. It’s jarring - I’m focused on the synth. Pattern choice is okay for this instrument other.

Variety: C
Not too varied. It’s really just jumps, a few hands and 3-minijacks and a couple holds. Too barebones.

Flow: A
It flows pretty well.

Potential: D
The chart feels half-done and with barely any effort put into it. Did you make this two days before the deadline?

Overall: 18/28

Rock-a-doodle-doo #2

Tech: A
It’s alright. Not too good, but definitely not bad. A couple questionable pattern choices: inverse LNs don’t work there. Straight quads in the ending?

Variety: C
It’s pretty much straight up JS or even chordstream.

Flow: A
Pretty good flow, no questions there. The funk is represented as much as possible with the notes given.

Potential: A
This chart is what it is. For a 14.43, it has little to improve besides the ending.

Overall: 22 / 28

Overwatch Theme #1

Tech: B
Executed okay, no errors found. Pattern choice sucks in many places however: the trills don’t work and double holds are omnipresent. Double holds should only be reserved for simple segments because the severely limit what you can do. They’re on par with quads in how much they limit you.

Variety: C
Straight holdstream, not much to say.

Flow: A
It flows very well, but that’s a given for patterns chosen.

Potential: X
Cannot grade this, the MSD is too low.

Overall: 15 / 21 -> 20 / 28

Overwatch Theme #2 (XMOD!)

Tech: E
Horrible xmod execution: unsightreadable, yet used little. Also custom BPM is not set so it’s not mmod compatible.
With patterns, the PR is non-existent, the pattern choice is okay in some places, but some holds are of incorrect length

Variety: D
It’s JS and simple holds.

Flow: X
X for Xmod, the flow is broken in the worst way possible.

Potential: D
Even removing xmod, this chart is very bland and not fun to play.

Overall: 8 / 21 -> 11 / 28.


Tech: D
The intro is good, but then it all goes to shit.
Major errors: no accents on sounds, it plays like a straight chordstream with 32nd rolls, but the song is much more varied than that. Incorrect snaps everywhere as well, for example 0:23 – this is a 24th, not a 16th. The rolls feels too slow.

Actual ghost notes in places like 0:41. Invalid snaps again at 0:51 – this is a 24th. And so on.

Variety: C
Jumps for actual notes, taps for ghost and filler notes, 32nd roll for wub, a hand for the click-like sound (and not always). There, I described your whole chart.

Flow: A
It does flow, but the flow is artificial. A for artificial flow.

Potential: D
If you were to remove all ghost notes and filler, you’d get a decent skeleton chart, but that’s about all.

Overall: 16 / 28.

Tech: A
It’s pretty good, not much questions. I’m not really sure about fake (?) rolls you have throughougt the song, they seem to be confusing – should I tap them or not? Are they decorative or real?
The song deserves so much more love though, deserves to be charted more.

Variety: X
It’s not super varied, but this stems from it being a 13 chart. Can’t grade.

Flow: A
It flows just fine.

Potential: A
The chart works just as it is. Only a few segments to change to make it a good 13.

Overall: 18 / 21 -> 24 / 28.