[Member Intro] Trying to break the 1m time barrier =D

[theos]

Hey friends,
I can't seem to find the right clue on how to solve my particular case of the last 2 edge pieces needing to swap sides. Can someone help me out?

You're not going to be able to complete both edges without doing a parity alg. You should be able to use the same methods you've been using to at least complete one of the edges. The other edge will necessarily have all the right pieces but some will be flipped over (misoriented). Then you might be able to adapt the OLL parity alg that you used for 4x4 to this 8x8.

 

[Manxkiwi]

I watched a YouTube tutorial for 8x8 where the guy explained how to swap center pieces between the last 2 unsolved faces and called it 'contouring'. Sorry, I can't explain too much better, maybe someone can?

Ah ok, maybe it's another term for commutators?

With regard to your parity: I learned to solve edges from center cubies outwards, fixing parities as required as the layers move outwards. This might be a basic method? Not sure, I would think the really fast solvers have other methods. If you fix your parity the way I do, I think you'd lose the outermost edges, then have to fix them subsequently.
NB, I'm not particularly quick on big cubes, just love doing them.

 

[Manxkiwi]

Actually I think you can fix that type of parity by only moving the affected slices. Without disturbing the outer cubies.

 

[EngiNerdBrian]

I watched a YouTube tutorial for 8x8 where the guy explained how to swap center pieces between the last 2 unsolved faces and called it 'contouring'. Sorry, I can't explain too much better, maybe someone can?

This move you’re describing is what we’d call a “commutator”. You’ll hear that a lot in the cubing world.

 

[muph]

This move you’re describing is what we’d call a “commutator”. You’ll hear that a lot in the cubing world.

Cool thanks for clearing this up! Probably I should have just payed better attention when I watched the tutorial

 

[muph]

So I finished the 8x8 thanks for all the advice. Had to redo a couple steps because I misread the notation (could it be there isn't ONE consistent way of doing it? At some point I figured out there were differences between the cubes, but also between cubers...?), solved the 2nd to last edge and then found an algorithm to solve the last 1.

Do you guys use those algorithms intuitively? I mean, do you understand WHY the pieces have to be moved that way?

 

[theos]

So I finished the 8x8 thanks for all the advice. Had to redo a couple steps because I misread the notation (could it be there isn't ONE consistent way of doing it? At some point I figured out there were differences between the cubes, but also between cubers...?), solved the 2nd to last edge and then found an algorithm to solve the last 1.

Do you guys use those algorithms intuitively? I mean, do you understand WHY the pieces have to be moved that way?

Well done. 4x4-7x7 are going to seem like a piece of cake now. There is standard official (WCA) notation but that is for outer block turns only. As soon as you start dealing with inner slice turns of bigger cubes, the notation starts to vary.

We normally distinguish between algorithms and intuitive solving, in that algorithms are learned move sequences to accomplish a step, and intuitive solving is more about understanding how the pieces (or blocks) move around. Cross, F2L and big cube edge-building tend to be intuitive, whereas OLL and PLL are algorithmic. Now some algorithms can be understood intuitively (I personally can intuit any algorithm based on conjugates and commutators such as the typical A-Perm algorithm) but most solvers don't care and many good algorithms are found by computer search anyway.