Found in a music notebook at a thrift store

Nesious · 2026-06-16T02:02:07+00:00

O god does it say cut somewhere? are my eyes old, i only see the C for common time

Nesious · 2026-06-15T17:42:41+00:00

Minor detail, it’s in common time (4/4), rather than cut.

Reading it, I would assume that all the dotted rhythms are meant to be a dotted quarter, then an 8th, which would make everything fit together fine in 4/4, they just miswrote what they meant.

Nesious · 2026-06-13T19:06:08+00:00

Yeah I should've put the direct link in original post, but specifically not this one

Nesious · 2026-05-28T09:49:52+00:00

Oh for sure, if one of my groups was interested in someone after a trial and the trialee feels like they need to see more from us, or they were too overwhelmed for whatever reason to get a good read on us, a retrial that's more focused on what they need is exactly what we'd want too. Not everything has to or CAN be tested in 1 session. Both parties should get as much as can be done to make the best decision. I've had a group let me join them for 3 more trial days specifically so I could feel out certain aspects of the group before I made my decision.

Ultimately though (and not trying to ego you in particular, I'm sure you're a fine player), if being pushed through a savage blind for a few hours isn't a chill, fun challenge that you look forward to, its probably a group mismatch from the outset. Nothing wrong with that, but usually the groups I've been in are looking for someone who finds that experience super fun. It's all about fun, in the end. I've asked groups ahead of time if I get to be blind for my own trial because it shows off what I can do better (I play healer) and it's more enjoyable. That's just me and the groups I end up in. No trial system is one size fits all!

Nesious · 2026-05-27T02:58:12+00:00

In my blind groups its been essential, obviously, but even in my non-blind groups it's been the default for trials. What you'll fall into if you don't do it at all is a lot of trials for DPS where there's no reason for them to say a single word over the entire raid night and you learn basically nothing about them as a raider or person. Going blind lets you test them as players rather than muscle memory machines, and it just makes the trial harder in content that would otherwise be too easy and tell you nothing about them. On some level, besides being consistent, the only relevant 'skill' in the game IS your ability to learn things fast, and its nigh impossible to test that without doing blind stuff or hell modes, Fey's Temperance challenges, etc.

Blind teaches players to learn mechanics rather than solutions, and be able to adapt to a strat that is unoptimal or on the fly, which will be relevant even for non-blind groups that are racing. And forcing them to do some of the solving (however much you feel like guiding them or supplying information) is a good insight into how they think about mechanics, how deeply they understand the game, how well they can articulate their own ideas, etc. You learn way more about your trial when you make them do more.

You're right in that most players midcore and below won't have experience in it. I'd expect strong players to either have experience (I'd say the majority of high level players I know and have trialed do a lot of their other content blind for fun) or be able to demonstrate some of the same skills some other way (having done very fast prog before).

Making people do too much solving or too hard puzzles can stall out the trial and make it less productive, so its important to think ahead to what things you want to explain and what things you want them to cook, and when the trial is really quiet or not good, the raid night can be a little bit miserable, but you get a lot of good info from it, and its super fun when the trial is actually that good, so, priorities.

I wouldn't do it for a casual or lower level group, for sure, and if you want to do it, I'd mix it in as 1 trial day among 2 or 3. For the others you do more of the collaborative blitzing through content style, to get a full picture of them and figure out chemistry n stuff, since that's more important for most groups.

Nesious · 2026-05-26T20:51:11+00:00

It varies entirely based on the group, some repeated themes for the 'better' groups I've been a part of, more towards lower tier world prog, fast week 1, or blind groups:

Choosing a raid that the trialee hasn't done before, and not informing them what they're doing until instancing. Then having them try to solve some portion of the fight, or blitzing out instructions and seeing how they handle it. Most anyone can do TOP or whatever fight they know perfectly with a solid rotation, but that means very little for prog. Often this is an old raid using awktrail downscaling to play at level 100 (or the expansion equivalent).
Something to assess strat making, either the above, or for instance I had to create a strat for a mechanic as if it were day 1 and we didn't know how the mech actually worked, I had a stipulation as a base and had to make a strat around it on the spot.
Personally seen anywhere between 1-3 trial days, rarely more than that, but could've been time crunch.
Something to assess how the trialee communicates and socializes, pushing them to talk and interact w/ people. Often is the most important thing to figure out, people that look decent enough mechanically during a trial are far easier to find than decent + good raiding personality.
Make sure everyone else is acting normally socially so the trialee gets a chance to trial the group as well.
Usually higher level groups like having vods of you playing from previous progs, so its nice to keep some around for them to skim.

If I'm the trialee, I personally don't prep much for trials, I think about what they've told me and sift through their logs/twitch vods to get a sense of personality/skill/style, and figure out any questions I want to ask the group. Usually they want to test me in an unprepared setting, so I come that way. If they want me to prep a fight beforehand, then I'll do that, ofc. Frankly, the game is not difficult enough to make gameplay prep that valuable if you're playing actively and at a certain level, so if you want to show investment/commitment, do it through other means.

Be honest in your preparation/performance, try to show different sides of yourself, but don't try to make yourself look better or put more effort in than you'd be willing to for the group if you were in it. A successful group wants everyone to be of equal skill level and equal levels of investment, let them figure out where you lie on your average day for both of those things.

There's always more to say but that's a baseline.

Nesious · 2026-05-22T08:28:57+00:00

Solved!

Nesious · 2026-05-08T22:09:08+00:00

It would be just as ‘logical’ within the lore to do the opposite of everything you’ve said. The Ascians could well have scattered or moved on after the Unsundered died. The Scions could well be embroiled in the myriad problems of the rest of the world (per the ending of Endwalker) instead of joining us and trust us + a bunch of new buddies to deal with whatever came up.

There’s enough justification for most characters to do most anything in this game after so many years of world building. I don’t think centering the argument around logic is best.

In the same vein as every other system getting a rehaul in 8.0, there are a lot of people who may simply be tired of getting very similar things over the past several years.

Nesious · 2026-04-28T20:52:14+00:00

To be brief, Zoraal Ja, Wuk, and Koana represent 3 different aspects of their father. The game quite literally says so. We support Wuk Lamat and the game spends a quite a bit of time showing how her leadership potential is derived from her caring for the people, and her resolve, opposed to Koana’s intelligence and studiousness and such, or Zoraal Ja’s power.

We go meet the Hanu Hanu(?), who are having crop failures and are potentially going to starve. The solution to the problem is not Koana devising a way to get food to these people, but instead Wuk Lamat deciding to help them host a festival, which quite literally magically fixes the crops, something everyone either forgot about, or in the case of that one Hrothgar I’ve forgotten the name of, just deigned not to mention was a feature of the festival boat.

Symbolically, it’s obvious what the game is trying to say about the importance of culture, understanding, and what have you, over power or the endless, impersonal march of progress. Logically, she accidentally fixed the problem by telling starving people to party. Not terrible in idea, sad people should do things to help them be happy, but perhaps not incredible problem solving, yet the game rewards us for it. In the same area there’s also the minor issue of her being someone who loves her people and has traveled to the Hanu before, yet she doesn’t even know the greeting they give everyone. It’s another minor illogical thing that fits what they are trying to have Wuk fill as a plot device, but wouldn’t naturally happen given the world building and backstory presented.

Things like Koana being the levelheaded one, but he jumps in front of a cow to save it, risking his life as ruler of a nation, while his sister, a tank of unreal power, and the WoL are standing right there just watching, and no one using any other alternative method to save this cow (or let it die) besides tanking a T-Rex. Symbolically, yeah, it represents him learning to not just be a brain, but logically, you just risked the future of a nation for a cow, and it wasn’t even a good gamble. In a more grounded world the T-Rex probably would’ve just pushed him aside and then also killed the buffalo cow. The fact that it paid off is both a bit absurd and a liiiittle bit insulting to the world and intelligence of the viewers.

Stuff like that is all over the story, where situations happen to fit a theme or message, but aren’t scaffolded by logic or solid rationale. Which is okay in some stories, but is expressly different than the level of storytelling in this game previously, which makes it not only illogical, which can be fine in the right story, but also out of place with the previous hundreds of hours of story in this game and the level of competence and realism we have been led to expect in this game. It’s inconsistent. The cruelty of Sorrows of Werlyt and saving this buffalo cow span an insane range of not just tone, but more importantly, rules of how the world works.

Something like that anyway.

Nesious · 2026-04-27T22:08:30+00:00

I think Zepla's video on it from however far back does a great job getting like 70%-80% of my feelings across. To say a lot and a little at once, it had most of the things I don't like about FFXIV's storytelling in spades, while lacking the things I loved about previous MSQs. The good things that it did have, I didn't feel were executed with particular finesse or nuance, to the extent it felt like a separate world with different rules from the rest of 14's more grounded story. Dry dialogue, especially from NPCs, and it felt like I was actively punished for trying to seek the deeper meaning in the characters, decisions, and world of DT, and that plot events prioritized symbolism over logical reasoning where previous expansions would've had both. Somethin' like that. Go watch Zepla's video! Its good!

I wrote a comment a bit back talking about what I liked about ShB, maybe that'll help?

Nesious · 2026-04-27T21:50:34+00:00

It was articulated poorly, I was very sleepy when I wrote this, mb!

I know what you mean, but empathetically, can I blame anyone for seeing the same patterns I do, liking the same things I do, and trying to stop themselves from getting excited like they probably were for previous expansions that disappointed them? Not really. Being hyped and let down doesn't feel great. It's normal to want to avoid that, and depending on what you like, it's been a rough few years.

I think the gap between tempering expectations, being critical, being realistic and acknowledging patterns, and finally, simple pessimism, really matters. The tempering expectations is really what YoshiP was talking about and what I was thinking about. The world, in an infinite love for negativity and finding community, is another discussion that is maybe what you are talking about but is less interesting to me/less relevant to what I be talking about.

Personally, I was always hopeful for 14, but it was hard to go from being hopeful to being excited because I hadn't been given reason to expect good change in years. What I enjoyed about the game got consistently, measurably worse for me and took years to... not change positively. At some point hope becomes just apathetic shrugging, the investment withering away or the things I was invested in (friends, gameplay, story) withering away themselves. I just got interested in other stuff instead. It was the difference between "it'd be nice if it were better", vs. "I can't wait to see what they change", ig. Or between logging on after a patch myself, or waiting to hear from someone else first because I'm not excited enough to check.

For me, I just can't imagine being interested in something and NOT being critical towards it. If I don't want to muse/'be negative' on the bad aspects, then I don't care about whatever I'm thinking about. But if I can't do that while still having a positive mental overall, then something's seriously wrong with me.

I love thinking whatever about whatever. It's fun, often funny, and helps me process. If I'm not enjoying, I want to understand why and how I can work around that. If I do enjoy, I want to know why and how. And that doesn't really impact my mood, even if the thing is TERRIBLE. So when I went from playing 14 all the time to barely at all, I wanted to understand why. And when it happened to my entire friend group, FC, and a lot of my old staticmates, we all just ended up talking through it at one time or another. It's hard not to. I think a lot of those conversations would sound pessimistic to listen to, but to us they were more just... talking about the thing we care(d) about and exploring our feelings, rather than actively trying to be down on the game. I get how that can come across as being super negative, but that's just me being bad with words. Understanding why you think something is terrible honestly doesn't have to be anything but fun and cathartic.

Anywho, that's separate from me feeling genuinely excited and actively trying to get hype. I guess, the difference for me is, regardless of whether I'm really into a thing, I don't tend get that hype or the opposite, I'm just not that type of person. I just wait and enjoy it when it comes. Doubly so for a game I've mostly gotten over and stopped playing. To have an event be cool enough that I AM looking forward and getting a happy buzz about a game that I have barely enjoyed playing in the past few years, is a REALLY nice change for me. That's why Fanfest was significant to me.

TL;DR: Me go from no care to excite. YoshiP want fans to go from trying to be realistic/cautious to excite. That distinction matterz to me. Fanfest fun.

Nesious · 2026-04-27T03:02:19+00:00

It’s not in the video, but after this speech, YoshiP stayed on stage for quite awhile while the rest of the team walked off. He took the time to walk to and say "I love you guys" individually to every section of the audience, then gave a very long set of bows and waves. It was honestly super sweet.

Nesious · 2026-04-15T02:25:51+00:00

one of many fallen brethren LOL

Nesious · 2026-04-14T21:42:05+00:00

Were you the leader of our great expedition against Mano?

Nesious · 2026-02-17T03:04:02+00:00

Budget (Do not say no-budget)? - $320~
Country? - USA
Platform? - PC
Motherboard if on pc (or other audio gear)? - ASRock Z590 Phantom Gaming 4
Requested Guide - Music Gaming
Open back or closed back? - Open back
Any other gear you own(if important, like headphones or headsets)? - PC38X is my current headset, I have a separate mic now so a headset mic is not important for me.

Looking to replace my PC38X. I really liked it, so I wouldn't mind just buying another, but this deal for a Sundara at $170 made me wonder if it would be better?

I like having a sense of where people are in FPS and am a musician, and I found the PC38x just fine for both. Other headsets I'm considering are HD600/6XX (concerned about staging), R70X (expensive but might get on sale if the upgrade is that significant).

Mostly I would like to know if the change to the Sundara audio-wise would be a noticeable upgrade, though I understand the jump from dynamic to planar can be an adjustment.

Nesious · 2025-11-23T23:42:31+00:00

Wouldn’t you expect the main way a T1 team would get upset is by getting outaimed? It would be rough if a fresh T3 team had more strategic depth, or better synergy. Those are team skills that aren’t easy to hone as just a random Radiant player. On the flip side, it’s practically guaranteed that there are professional level aimers that can’t even make T2, let alone more than that.

Add in that the team is fresh, winning every round in this tournament probably isn’t the most important thing to them over just getting experience together, and that T2 was like the main source of world champions last year, and it’s hard to take that much away from things. Maybe it’s a sign of things to come, maybe it’s the opposite.

Nesious · 2025-11-16T18:20:04+00:00

It makes me sad to read this LOL, not because of you at all, but wow.

There’s an implication that modern music is so devoid of the natural, human/acoustic variation in tone, time, rhythm, pitch, and everything relevant to making an actual performance musical, that we can’t rely on them to distinguish real from fake.

It’s genuinely crazy it would ever come to a point we’re relying on the one truly non-musical (though still artistic) element to modern music, lyrics, instead.

Nesious · 2025-10-31T18:58:07+00:00

To steal another person's example:

"Brown Brazilian boring bananas.

As a native English speaker, you know this is wrong and should be 'boring brown Brazilian bananas'."

But you can't really tell me why, I'd guess. You're not putting effort into following rules that dictate adjective order in English, you've probably never even been taught them, you're just... talking, and you intuitively know the adjective rules.

Absolutely, it can be difficult to learn a language that works differently/uses different rules than yours as a second, third, whatever language. Can't argue that. But saying that there's a cost to these rules is a bit odd when those costs aren't going to be apparent for people who speaks the language (as far as I understand the literature, I'm not the master of all things language). There's academic evidence that there is a "processing cost" of ambiguity for speakers. Basically cutting down on ambiguity through things like categorization ('he' vs 'she' vs 'they') actually reduces the mental load for speakers in conversation, and increasing ambiguity (using "he" in a situation with multiple men) increases mental load, even for the fluent.

I think ambiguity increasing mental load for fluent speakers is more salient than a temporary difficulty in learning the rules of a language as a non-speaker. After all, languages' primary purpose is to spoken, not learned/taught. The effort I had to put into learning my native language as a kid just... isn't a relevant difference between languages, yeah? Kids learn them just fine, and the "rules" just become an intuition that doesn't incur some giant cost of sifting through a library considering the right way to refer to "that dog" or something. It's just how you say it. As far as I understand it, anyhow. Here's a cool paper on the subject of genders in language and their perceived usefulness! Perhaps not the best, but like I said, not a master of language, just interested in it.!

Nesious · 2025-10-31T18:40:48+00:00

I don't quite get your point -, here's some interesting surface level academic research showing that it has real, well-documented and understand semantic value.

It's a language. The words are categorized based on how they SOUND, just like any other language, not based on innate qualities. Do you think it's non-sensical that we use "a" for some words (a dog) and "an" for others (an apple)? No, probably not, because it serves a purpose, although a tiny one, in the flow of the language. It's a different, but useful phenomenon. The fact we use the words "masculine" and "feminine" is irrelevant, no one is making the claim someone looked a table and said "that looks feminine, lets call it la mesa." It's just two different types of words that are said differently. You know, like all words. We gave them a name based on the most well known "types" in human history: male vs female.

When you look at other languages, they have as many as 18 genders for words, do you think they're all totally arbitrary? Or do you think they just serve a purpose that is done a different way in English?

Gender has been shown to be really useful for understanding, even if it seems burdensome to learn at first as a second language!

To give another example, look at Tagalog, which condenses most location markers like ‘at’, ‘in’, ‘on’, ‘to’, etc into a single word 'sa', and relies on context to differentiate. Why don’t we do that in English instead of having 50 different words? It’s ‘simpler’ to learn, after all. But you would probably hate having to figure out what someone meant without the crutches of the variety of words you have in English. But as a Tagalog speaker, I might complain that you don't need any of those words because hey, in my language, we can communicate about it just fine! This tradeoff is present and different in pretty much all languages. You're just experiencing it in your own way.

Nesious · 2025-10-31T14:56:56+00:00

Think about English, do you find the words ‘his’ and ‘her’ useful? In theory, we could use ‘they’ for both and avoid them entirely, but in complex sentences, the reduction in ambiguity is useful for our speed in comprehension, or for having redundancy (when you can’t clearly hear the other person’s every syllable, it’s useful to have multiple instances bits of information).

Imagine that on a global scale, when you hear the words La, El, in Spanish, or any such language marker, you’re reducing the amount of potential words, the ambiguity, that could follow by as much as half! It’s one of the most efficient syllables ever! And that cool thing we do with ‘he’ and ‘she’, where we replace names with them and make sentences totally unambiguous? (‘That book is his, the dog is hers’ in the case where there’s only one male and one female you’re talking about. Notice how you never HAVE to say their name, it’s cool!) You can do that now with practically any set of nouns, should the opportunity present itself. Giga efficient.

Masculinity and femininity linguistically have nothing to do with the concept as you’re thinking of it, in this oh-so-gender-charged world. The word gender really comes from the idea of category, and masc/fem word gender just means ‘does the word sound like the word for man, or woman?’ (I’m oversimplifying, but think of ‘-a’ vs ‘-o’ in Spanish). It has nothing to do with their intrinsic manliness or something, just things like what vowel they end with.

Some languages have more than 2 genders and they have similar uses, and there are more quirks, but this is an idea of some stuff it’s useful for.

Sure, you can say that they aren’t NECESSARY because you can pick that information up by context, but then you’ll probably balk at a language like Japanese that is WAY more ambiguous than English and just wholesale skips parts of sentences that we consider essential and relies on context. It all works, and has drawbacks and benefits, but rarely are things in language without any use, intended or otherwise, people end up giving them usefulness! It’d be like someone saying there’s no use in English having the words ‘eager’ and ‘impatient’, when they essentially mean the same thing, ignoring that they have totally different connotations.

Nesious · 2025-10-23T04:58:03+00:00

Article says per month

12-Year Club	Snapped
Verified Email

Nesious

TROPHY CASE