PC Plum

Cool man :D I tried that, it will take more experimenting...

Thanks Daikano, I did try that but although it shows C# Standard in the arrangements frame (until you hit edit that arrangement again) it still shows up as Custom Tuning in game. I've tried a few different Toolkit release, and up until master-2.6.1.0-1d45d6373add adding this arrangement https://www.sendspace.com/file/mnciqm gives it a C# Standard tuning. All subsequent Toolkit releases (that I have) call it DbGbBEBE (and so it is called custom tuning in game). @@Alex360, is it because you fixed the tuning for me before? I remember you said that the problem I had before was because the Toolkit was not checking all 6 strings (it was a guitar arrangment) - did you make it check 6 strings even for bass? I will build with an old Toolkit just now because I want it to say C# Standard. It bugs me that much :D

No, when people make a cdlc they need to put together certain things. You need to include a tone of some sort, there are many ways to do this but the easiest is to import from another custom. Believe it or not some people spend hours and hours of their life learning how to make a chart, making one and then pack it together with no tone. When there is no tone in the custom this is what breaks the game, it goes to a clean tone and you cannot change it any more until you restart the game. It is less common now because the toolkit adds a "default" tone if no tone is selected. You can use the toolkit to add your own tone to a custom without one so that you can play it without "breaking the game".

I believe that the cause is the induvidual customs themselves. I have never read anything to say otherwise. If you play a lot of customs that cause this problem then maybe learn to add your own tones. It's really not that hard once you learn how to do it, it's only a 2 minute job. Might take you 2 hours the first time though :D - Download the toolkit - Unpack troublesome custom - Repack with the tone you like (you can import tones directly from other customs, so just remember/write down the ones you like) And remember, you don't even have to get the replacement tones perfect. As long as there is a tone there then it will not "break" the game, so you can easily hit 1, 2, 3, 4 to engage yet another tone to play the song with. And btw, your Youtube channel is great :) But I don't see any PC Plum customs on there :(

Thanks :) I will experiment some more. I have definitely made bass arrangements that say D Standard before. A small problem but it bugs me a lot :(

You can reverse it by using an old version of EoF to import the GP file. I keep a few EoFs hanging about for various reasons. It's easy enough to begin an old EoF, load up your project, import the GP file, save it, open the newest EoF then load it up. That way you get a clean import and all the benefits of the latest EoF :)

It is the CDLC Name field top left of the toolkit (the one that does not allow spaces). Call it something unique - I always have Plum in it somewhere e.g. U2PridePlum When changing it though, remove all your arrangements and re-add them. This will give them new arrangement numbers and stop any crashes. The game will think its a brand new song and give you a play count/score of 0 though.

Then it overwrites the D Standard tuning in the toolkit and names it DGCFAD. This makes the guitar arrangement also called custom tuning in game :(

Hi, been using master-2.6.1.0-ba47adfc2f0d since you fixed the last tuning issue for me. Thanks Alex360 :D I am having more trouble now. I have been making some songs in low tunings (C# Standard and now D Standard). While I can make it work no problem the bass arrangemets always come up as "Custom Tuning" in game instead of "D Standard". This is because when I pull the bass xml into the toolkit, the toolkit insists on defining 6 strings. So instead of -2, -2, -2, -2 and it is called "D Standard" I get -2, -2, -2, -2, 0, 0 and the toolkit then makes it a custom tuning. What do I need to do to make it say "D Stanard" for bass again? Like I say it works fine, its just that it may confuse some people when they play the custom. Other songs (official and cdlc) say "D Standard" for bass no problem.

Sorry for stating the obvious but... no one seems to have mentioned calibration. In the tuner hit return (or the Enter key if you wanna call it that) and it takes you to the calibraiton screen. Definitely worth a shot :D

1370 brings back the no count phrase warning. Not complaining just saying :D

Wwise can be a confusing install. I, personally, go for the least heavy option (no SDKs or anything). Before trying again go to Control Panel - Uninstall Software - Uninstall everything with Wwise in the name. Now go to your downloads folder and delete everything with Wwise in the name. Now try again... Go to Wwise website and download the installer. This is a small file (about 10MB if I remember correctly) that will begin the install then download the rest. How much it downloads depends on what tick boxes you have enabled. If you have then all enabled it will be a few GBs and can take a few hours (depending on how fast your net is) and download tonnes of stuff you don't need. Untick everything before hitting continue/install. The last time I installed it downloaded about 100MB. Once it installs it will ask you if you want to save the installer - choose YES!!! then you won't have to go through this again if you reinstall Windows or want it on another machine. And this very well may be your problem... you are running the installer instead of the program? The icons do look very similar. The Wwise icon(s) should be on your desktop and in your start menu. For simplicity I would run the 32-bit version. It will have "32-bit" written in the name. Now... there are some excellent tutorials on here on how to actually use Wwise. Good luck :D

Maybe he has emulated bass switched on but is using a real bass?

Maybe latency is too low for your system if you have messed with the settings? If you are running too low a latency it can cause crackles in the sound. I would leave latency on auto. That's a personal opinion, many people experiment and use manual latency settings, but I've never found the need. I did use custom latency settings in RS12, but auto in RS14 works great for me. Just look though settings until you find latency (think its in Audio Engine but I'm not positive). And remember that you need to restart the game each time you change it for it to take effect.

I forgot to say that you convinced me about ADC, but there is definitely value in having a dedicated, powered guitar input. I just can't believe that a cable with an ADC is as good at getting the best out of your pickups than proper guitar input with a pre amp. Even plugging into your effects is plugging into a specialised input. And your effect unit has a proper power supply. No, I didn't test the differences between the interfaces I've used, and I only ever heard the RME through the guys monitors cleanly (its on an album but its mixed in really low and with lots of software effects) but I did try to use the RS cables a few times and it was actually after a few sessions when I couldn't get the sound I wanted (even using saved presets on the plugins/channel strips) that I realised it was the source audio i.e. the guitar being recorded through the RS cable. As soon as I moved back then it sounded great again. Its maybe not scientific and good sound is perception, and I can't really put into words the differences I could hear (an example would be power chords, they just didn't bite and sustain enough), but I do have an opinion. And I wouldn't say stuff and make recommendations unless I believed them. If people wanna record themselves playing guitar then I suggest buying a dedicated interface, its not bad advice ya know. If you just wanna mess around and have a RS cable, go for it :D Anyway, its been a fun discussion man, thanks :D

The thing I disliked about the UCG was messing with cables to use it... I'm gonna stand by my original statement on the RS cable though. I think that it does sound pretty meh on its own and I still believe that you are never going to get a full guitar sound using it to record as the single source i.e. guitar, RS cable and pc. I was using the Tascam to record my old bands album, hated getting it out and setting it up all the time to do guitar overdubs, was delighted when I realised I could plug my guitar straight in using the RS cable, quickly started getting the Tascam out again as it sounded much better. The sound the RS cable was producing could not be salvaged with guitar effects software to the standard that I wanted and could easily achieve with the Tascam. I've also had the privilege of using a $1000 RME interface at a friends house, and the clean guitar sound you can get with that is beautiful. With my own guitar. A sound that's just not possible to get using the RS cable. No matter what is said to me, I've heard it with my own ears. Clear as day. For messing about the RS cable is ideal, but I'd still recommend people to spend some cash in a dedicated interface. Even $100 interfaces come with Cubase LE, which has some basic guitar effects as well as compressors and reverb. And there are tonnes of free plugins (yes, I mean legally free) you can get these days for all sorts of audio fun. Come on, there's a reason you bought an Allen and Heath interface. I'll bet there's cheaper interfaces with the same functionality. I'd wager that you went for the Allen and Heath because it sounded good...

It was quite easy to group them together, i just didn't know which was the Zed 10 and which was the RS cable. Although, I'm going to have to say it went my way. There is a clear audible difference. The RS cable is better at ADC than your expensive Zed 10 :D Actually they just weren't normalised properly, the ones I identified as the Zed 10 were clearly louder, and actually sounded a little compressed compared to the others.

Well I can see that you are far more knowledgeable than me, which puzzles me even further why you would be saying such thngs - that the RS cable is as good as anything... I do like (reading about) high end hifi I and do see the same DACs being used in a lot of equipment (Wolfson, Burr Brown), so your theory on DACs/ADCs being similar I can take on board, it must be the rest of the electronics in the piece of equipment making the difference, or the filters being used. But the problem remains in the argument... you are not using the RS cable as an input in the same way as me. You have a (high quality) piece of electronics acting as a guitar input/preamp. Plug the RS cable straight into your pc and record it, then see for yourself the difference. I have answered your form btw. I was going to open the sound file in Cubase to help me, but I answered with a quick listen to the wav file through my pc speakers.

Well I'm no electronics student, maybe my termonoligy was wrong. Active DI no... There is a load though, and SOS says "The output voltage from the source is developed across the input impedance of the destination (often called the load impedance, or simply the load), and therefore the signal voltage is passed from source to destination." "If the input has too low an impedance, the most noticeable effect will be a loss of high end — in fact, even using guitar cables with too high a capacitance can audibly reduce high frequencies (see 'Impedance & Frequency Response' box for details of this effect). The sustain is also affected, giving a 'dead' sound." I'm not going to pretend to fully understand that but I know enough to say that the preamp (in this case the RS cable) effects the sound. Its scientific, not hear say. Better preamps = better, more accurate sound. There is also the question of qualtiy of materials. While I'd never spend $1000s on a speaker cable, I can quite clearly hear the difference between $1/metre speaker cable and $10/metre speaker cable. Not every cable (I can't poosibly hear them all), just the stuff I bought. The RS cable is cheap because it has cheap electronics, cheap materials and a cheap preamp. And sounds it.

It's not just an ADC its an active DI. It must offer load to the guitar pickups or there would be no sound. When I critisiced the RS cable I was using it as a direct input - guitar to RS cable to pc. I stand by that criticism, it works but it does not sound good (to me). I would advise people to spend a little cash on a decent interface, like the Zed 10 or Scarlett.

I'll take the test tonight at my own pc, I'm really interested now :D I can't really understand your argument though? You are saying that there is no difference in using the RS cable than anything else? Then why do some ADCs cost $1 and some ADCs cost £30,000? Why do studios spend millions on boutique cables, interfaces, DACs, ADCs, valve DI boxes etc etc, when they could just hook up a $20 RS cable and get the same result? I also dissagree that your mixer is not doing anything. On the contrary it's doing an awful lot. You are using a dedicated guitar input, which has specialised components (Allen and Heath are high quality products), correct impedences and it is balancing and attenuating the guitar signal. The guitar input also has a regulated power supply. In fact, your own link says These newly designed inputs have been crafted with the aim of replicating the sound of a classic guitar or instrument tube pre-amp in a combo or head amp. An extremely high input impedance ensures loading on pick-ups is minimal and a Class A FET (field effect transistor) circuit powered from 48V is employed to give the valve-like gain stage. There is a gain “Boost” switch associated with the guitar inputs which boosts gain by 26dB to cater for instruments with very low level outputs and the overdrive characteristics of the guitar inputs are very similar to a valve (tube) circuit, being asymmetric and soft. All this makes for a wonderfully natural sound to be reproduced from the instrument, full of warmth and character The Hi-Z input is probably the most important part of a DI guitar chain, and why people spend £1000s on products like this http://www.manley.com/mcore.php Your argument is basically saying that there is no difference between the RS cable and that (with all effects off)... it does not compute. Your test is testing the difference between the analogue to digital conversion of the RS cable versus the analogue to digital conversion of your Allen and Heath. It is not using the RS cable as a true input i.e. your guitar plugged into the pc via the RS cable and only the RS cable. I noticed a difference in quality between using the RS cable and my Tascam without any effects added, just the dry signal. Same guitar, same pc. There were no dynamics in the RS cable recording and a very thin and uneven EQ profile. I will have a listen tonight though, I'm definitely interested in testing my ears.

I actually have a UCG 102, I never use it because you need to hook up speakers/headphones to the out put of Behringer to hear it/use it. I prefer using the RS cable because you can have the output through your normal pc speakers. I also have a Tascam US-1800, however, which has DI inputs for guitar/bass. One time I couldn't be bothered pulling out the Tascam and setting it up so I used the Rocksmith USB Adaptor (what the RS cable shows up in Sound Devices) as the recording source. It was pitiful against the recordings I could get from the Tascam. Yes the RS cable works, and is a great bit of kit for the cash, but it does not sound great. I mean, who uses the clean sound even in Rocksmith? The first thing you do is run it through virtual amps/compressors/reverb/delay etc. Even in Firekorn's example he is using an Allen and Heath mixer, and using the guitar input of the mixer. Anyway, here is a clean recording using a Focusrite Scarlet 2i2. It wasn't me playing. I'm not wanting to start a debate on whether this sounds better than Firekorn's example, because I wanted a comparision between this and recording straight into the pc using the RS cable - which I might do tonight if I cba. https://drive.google.com/#folders/0Bw_JHBuT3gUAbDBkRkYyWThJSjQ And I actually just read your post properly Firekorn... I'll give the test a go tonight :D

I thought that the comparison was with a guitar plugged straight in using the RS cable? I mentioned hardware to give the example that using dedicated hardware is better. You are also saying that using hardware other than a single RS cable is better than using a single RS cable alone as an input.

Bullshit? Thats pretty harsh man. Upload some examples of sound (i.e. you recording using the RS cable). And we can compare it to even a $100 Focusrite interface, then I will eat my words.

If you use Bandicam to record a "video" of you playing in Rocksmith, there is an option for Bandicam to save a separate .wav of only the audio. You could do that then import the .wav into your audio program. Audacity is free and very highly regarded, I have the luxury of Cubase though... There are also lots of free plugins for Audacity (including pitch changin software). I've never tried it (other than to conver the multitrack .ogg files to individual .wav files) to record anything though. On the subject of recording your electro/acoustic though, I would suggest working out how to record more than one source simultaneously. Maybe a mic recording the "acoustic" guitar (you can get directional mics that will cut out a lot of backgorund noise) and a line recording from the guitar jack output. Then blend the sounds in your audio program to taste. I've used the RS cable to record my guitar before, and although it works its pretty poor quality. Its fine in the context of Rocksmith, or quick overdubs, where you are fitting the (thin) sound into an already busy mix, but it sounds pretty meh on its own. You are never going to achieve (imo) a full guitar sound recording with the RS cable. It's $20 for a reason :)