albatross213

I'm not an expert on this, but I believe there's some sort of caching that may cause the initial scroll speed to "remember" what it was before depending on whether you've played the track before making the adjustment and whether you updated the Arrangement ID numbers or not. @@Chlipouni knows much more of the subject than I do, and will hopefully be able to help you further.

Did a couple of goes at Dan! This was the best: http://i.imgur.com/sS7Ng8U.jpg Honestly thought it was a 100% run until I reached the break and noticed my multiplier was at x57. Not sure what exactly what I missed, but I don't think it was anything I had a good excuse to miss. Also tried the Muse. While my score was lower, I don't think it was actually harder, just that I was less prepared for the challenges it presents.

This post was supposed to be an edit of the original post. Oops.

Played through Feel Good Inc. last night. My scores on bass: http://i.imgur.com/Pkpa1n0.jpg and on lead: http://i.imgur.com/LBl8xKL.jpg Also, I noticed a few things, so if other people have played and would like to discuss, let me know. Otherwise I'll post to the record page this afternoon. 1) The sync seemed a little bit off to me. Not hugely off, but enough to make some parts feel a bit weird. When I opened it in EoF, it looked like this first picture. Only the offset needed to be changed, afterwards it looked like this second picture, and stayed well synced for the whole song (likely click tracked or quantized). 2) All of the slides down to the first fret should be unpitched. I think there's also one 5\3 slide on bass after the lead section that should be unpitched. 3) I'm almost certain this bass part (and its repeat) are in the wrong octave. Not exactly sure how the transition is managed, or if it's just that all of measure 43 is up an octave. @, can you check this? Does anyone disagree with any of these, or notice anything else that might warrant changing?

Um, I can't unpack it because the file name is too long! :huh:

Austrian Death Machine has very few RR sections, and none of them begin anywhere near the solo. It doesn't look like it has much in the way of time signatures or chord techniques, so I should be able to add sections and post it to the record page, but @@Comalive hasn't been online since October, so it's unlikely to get updated without the help of a mod.

A lot of new CDLC need front page (or near to it) exposure in order to get downloads, as otherwise it can be somewhat hard to find them. Given that it sounds like there will be 6,000 impending updates (in addition to whatever new uploads there are), will there be anything done to try to avoid drowning new uploads in pages and pages of updates of old CDLC?

Special update to mention that @@cdeath has released his 100th custom. You may not recognize the band name, but that's because it's us (you will probably notice the relation to cdeath's username)! I recorded the bass, and he did pretty much everything else. If you like death or thrash metal at all, please give it some love!

Now *this* was a good run! http://i.imgur.com/aOLlmfC.jpgTime to stop sucking on the solo.

@@firekorn - With the enactment of this rule after my appeal for an open discussion regarding this issue, it seems like you (not necessarily you personally, but the mod team, administration, or whatever) have had very little respect for our opinions so far in this process. Why should we expect contacting the admins directly to be any different?

@@firekorn, and others whom it may concern - After thinking about this a bit more, here's my suggestion. As of the current time, we have a mechanism in place to give a sort of feedback to the authors of the chosen CDLC, in that we always have a post that gives difficulty ratings. My suggestion is using that (or possibly piggybacking on that) to also give feedback on the DLC. To get into the specifics a bit more, we would have someone (quite possibly me, as I wouldn't want to burden the organizers more) who aggregates the feedback (and modifications, if made) throughout the week for each custom, then at the end of the week sends everything in a PM to the charter of the CDLC. If no response or update happens by the time the difficulty ratings are posted, this feedback will also be posted on the record page. Would this be acceptable for everyone? This would allow for discussion and testing of changes here, while still guaranteeing that the feedback makes its way to the charter in an orderly fashion.

@@then3verend - Related to what I said before, while I have not been good about sending updates to people in the past (though some of them have been ignored, which may be related to why I often don't bother), I still think we should have a "trial period" for these so charters don't have to spam updates based on our most recent whims. I'm all for having some sort of standard procedure enacted for how feedback progresses from the championship to people's record pages/updates (and using this as a catalyst to brainstorm ideas for a good way to do this would be a great idea), but unilaterally shutting down any comments and potential updates that might need further tweaking seems rather counterproductive. P.S. If you want to be consistent, you haven't removed Motive's link from this post, or this post. They haven't been posted to ignition either. Or this one where Metalocalypse quotes Motive.

@@then3verend - I know I'm one of the violators here, but I think you're going overboard here, at least this week (and I'm seriously unclear on how this relates to Site Rule 1. Douchebaggery, maybe?). This week the two songs that have had discussions about their quality and have had updates posted have been songs that were made by active members of the Championship, and were collaborations. And honestly, for myself I'd rather have discussion about any things that might need change on my songs to occur here rather than on the record page so we can have a discussion with multiple people who are playing the song seriously about what changes need to be made, and whether everyone's in agreement, without giving all of the people who follow the record umpteen notifications. For songs by people who aren't in the Championship, I agree that we should post onto their record pages, but even then I think there should be some allowance (maybe a day?) for discussion on here so that we can come to a consensus if people's opinions on the changes isn't unanimous. I bet people would get really annoyed at me if I posted a comment on their record pages every time I noticed something off when playing something in the Championship, especially if I'm playing all three paths.

@@instantdeath999 - Just curious, is it just when playing that C# there, or does it also occur on the B string? How about when you're in Eb tuning, does it cause misses on the 9th fret, 10th fret, or neither? I'm kind of curious because I've actually had some (temporary) problems with Rocksmith detecting the E2 note on my bass, regardless of tuning or which string I play it on. If it was an E2 it wouldn't register at least a noticeable percentage of the time. Based on the fact that it's happened with multiple instruments my first guess would that it's something to do with your cable, though I'd be hard pressed to explain why a frequency dependent lack of transmission would occur. It's also possible that it's something with Rocksmith itself. Maybe try recalibrating or something?

@@then3verend - I'm kind of surprised both that Carcass was lackluster and Slayer was awesome. Nice to know that Slayer can still put on a show, though. Anyway, I could go for a "Mike/Michael" band. Probably would be Drums - Mike Portnoy (or Mangini) Guitar - Michael Romeo Bass - Hmm, could go with LePond (also of Symphony X), Manring, or Flea. Any of those would be kind of interesting. Vocals - I guess Mike Patton?

@@then3verend - And Carcass, right? Honestly nowadays I'd be more excited about seeing them than Slayer... Anyway, I had a go at making some modifications to Architecture, with download link here. The modifications are roughly: -Sync modified somewhat. -Increased scroll speed a bit. -On bass, I added a few notes from before the main riff, made the As in the "machine gun" riff open, made the chorus steady eighths (which I'm pretty sure I'm hearing correctly), and shifted a few notes around the fretboard. -On guitar, made the remaining As in the "machine gun" riff open, changed the pitch slide chord to just another normal fretted chord, and made some small changes to the solo. Bass scores on this one might be lower than in the other version, so if this one becomes adopted it might make sense to invalidate the score from my previous 100% run. Here's an MM run for kicks: http://i.imgur.com/2vbnkUQ.jpgGot the verse riff down, but many of the other things need a little bit of practice. And a small improvement on lead: http://i.imgur.com/VXGQx55.jpg

@@TheDeathryder - Unfortunately, there are no Semblant customs, and I see no Semblant tabs. Since this thread is dedicated to bands already have CDLC, or for whom there are available GP tabs for CDLC to be made, it doesn't seem appropriate to add them. Otherwise, this thread could conceivably have 37,000 entries.

MC rhythm: http://i.imgur.com/FhCFzPR.jpgStill some room for improvement, but I doubt I can do much better than 98.5% because of the chord slides. MC lead: http://i.imgur.com/c0NmNvz.jpg Not as good a run on the rhythm stuff as my rhythm run, and I kind of suck at the solo. It's not ridiculously hard, but just not stuff that I'm very good at.

@@Dalton - I imagine that sharing DLC packs would be forbidden for the same reason as sharing complete DLC download folders. At the time of sharing none of the songs may be official, but (for many bands) you can't guarantee that they'll never become official, and as soon as they do become official, we can't share it (which is especially important for MCR as they've just had a second pack). The last thing that we want to do on here is seriously piss Ubi off.

Meh. http://i.imgur.com/y6sUDkd.jpg I've got a feeling this is heading towards master difficulty.

My attempt at MC rhythm. Not quite to @@Brutus Erectus's standard, but pretty close. http://i.imgur.com/PxzjDkx.jpg @@Nacholede - On rhythm, main comment is that the slides from the chords in the bridge riff (timestamp 1:50-2:10 in Brutus' video) should probably be unpitched rather than pitched. First of all, I don't think they're actually pitched, and second, as you can see from Brutus' playthroughs, it's a bit of a bitch to get them detected. I think also in the last chorus there was a hammer-on that was a slide in the other choruses (and makes more sense as a slide given hand positioning). Timestamp 3:14ish in the video, the 2h4 part. The hammer-on chord after that is also a little weird given that it's a single note before it. @@MaZtoR - It's only spamming if you @@Rodman it. Great example above this post! @@Rodman - 66.6% on the metal song! \m/

@@NunoJBSilva.Guitarist - For songs with DD, Learn a Song scores are not eligible if you have been downleveled on one of the phrases (orange/yellow rather than purple), as you were.

In Architecture of Aggression, there are some parts (especially in the choruses) where the sync is a bit off: http://i.imgur.com/7FH694M.pngThe notes are lagging behind the audio by as much as 1/30 of a second. It's not enough to cause misses if you play with the music, but it's enough for me to feel really weird when playing along to it. The sync also looks to be a bit off in some other places (for example here), but that's where it feels the worst In the fast part of the verse riff, the As are played on the open A string, as can be seen here. The rest looks to be played as charted. It's also missing some fairly obvious stuff, like when the drums and bass come in during the guitar intro twice before the tab has the bass coming in. This is a pretty good cover that shows things pretty clearly (though the video quality isn't great). Here's my score at the moment: http://i.imgur.com/RDxxkfO.jpg

@ - I had another idea, though it will significantly limit what you can chart. In more progressive and technical genres (especially metal), many bands now "quantize" the track, meaning that the bpm is (usually) exactly an integer, and all notes are exactly on the divisions of the beat. Practically speaking, this means that you don't need to do any syncing beyond entering the bpm in the tab and lining up the start of the song. So if there's enough stuff in those genres that you like, you can start out by only doing quantized tracks. I'm not sure exactly when this started becoming widespread, but you definitely see it a lot more in albums released after 2009. Bands that I've worked on that have had quantized tracks are Between the Buried and Me (Misdirect onwards, but they have so many tempo changes syncing still isn't completely trivial) Blotted Science Dream Theater (most recent album, maybe all of their post-Portnoy ones?) Galneryus (at least most recent album) Haken Intervals Obscura Riverside (SoNGS onward) Spawn of Possession Symphony X (Iconoclast onward)

Here's my best attempt at MC rhythm: http://i.imgur.com/81HfbaL.jpg Still some room for improvement for me (I totally bungled the last 30s of the song in this run, and this was my third straight 97.71% run), but improved my muscle memory for picking out the right string significantly while practicing this. And I definitely never played MC lead.