Azrael

Thanks for the new version, even though it didn't solve any of my problems :-) I checked another custom of mine which has variations in bpm and however this "4/4, 7/8, 2/4" - stuff is called, and it is handled pretty well. The only problems are of the same kind as in "Life". For usability I may suggest that the most important feature is the integration into the Custom Toolkit, with automated updates through the toolkit itself. This way you will reach out to a lot more people and will get more feedback. And if you feel like your program is not yet ready for that, I guess you can just stick to the beta releases of the Toolkit :-)

Nice, TuxGuitar 1.3 is working :-) (Even though I had to run it through compability mode for Win 8 on Win 8.1 - wierd^^) If you are interested, I can send you the original gp5 file from one of my songs, so that you can compare it to your output... there are a couple of mistakes (only talking about lead arrangement now): I will number the bars like this: original/output (they are different because of e.g. repititions) A random(?) note appears in all "silent" bars11/14: the note from the previous bar is just sustained, even though it should be played one more time and then sustained24/27: The first note appears as sustained from previous bar, even though it has not been played there (therefore it doesn't show up in the TAB)27/30: the first note is a sustain from the previous bar. It should be a pause instead.72/75: This is a very complicated bend (two half up, one half down, one half up, hold) which just becomes "two half up, hold"84/87: This is a slide 10/12 (originaly it was just noted as a grace note, because the beat is on the 12 and you just slide up to it). In your output it is just " /12", so there is no slide audible in midi playback94/97: The first note is a "prebend/release", and in the output it is just a normal bend All in all, those are just tiny mistakes, given how much is acutally correct :-) One idea: It would be neat to capture the section names from the psarc file Again: Great work and many thanks! Azrael Original gp5: https://www.dropbox.com/s/s5xe671t6sm32sj/devin_townsend_life_joris_6.gp5 psarc: https://www.dropbox.com/s/ood47orn029or4z/Devin-Townsend_Life_v1_2_DD_p.psarc output: (Version 0.7) https://www.dropbox.com/s/9sm3j47lq1w76aj/devintownsendlife.gpx

Updated my scores :-) Lead: 98.18 % (Master Difficulty :) ) http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=301310239 Rhythm: 98.77 % http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=301317472 Bass: 99.21 % http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=301321520 @, I don't know if yours is the same problem as mine, but I had a very hard time getting the 5-5-5 bare chords registered. I ended up frethand-muting them throughout the whole song - worked nearly perfectly, even though that's not how it is supposed to be played...

My intermediate song got chosen, yeay! Reading through all the posts I figured for some people Hypnotize seemed too easy for intermediate. I do agree that it is much easier than some of the recent songs, but this is what I think about it: In my opinion a song selection should be based on the "total" difficulty, not an "overall" difficulty. The solo from Hypnotize is definitely intermediate, so the whole song must be intermediate. In a couple of recent intermediate songs the overall difficulty was fine, but the solos were masterclass (from my point of view). It is frustrating to play such a song, because even if I a good job on the rest of the song, I cannot say that I "know how to play this song". I hope you understand what I mean :-) Anyway, here is my score: Lead: 98.18 % (Master Difficulty :) ) http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=301310239 Rhythm: 98.77 % http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=301317472 Bass: 99.21 % http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=301321520

I only have TuxGuitar so I cannot test it yet, but your program sounds amazing! +1 on this:

A lot of charters do not add Dynamic Difficulty for various reasons. But the good thing is that it really easy to add Dynamic Difficulty yourself to any song you like! - Download the Rocksmith Custom Toolkit here: http://www.rscustom.net/ - Open the program and click the tab "DDC" - "Add" the psarc file (the song you downloaded) - Set phrase length to "4" - Click generate - Put the created file in your DLC folder This dynamic difficulty creator does an awesome job at creating the different difficulty levels for you, just the way you know it from original content ;-)

Here are my scores for intermediate :-) They are quite satisfying, even though the solo was completely unplayable for me... Lead: 93.56 % http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=294923511 Rhythm: 97.60% http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=293984133 After a couple of playthoughs I really started to like the song, even though it's quite irritating not to understand the lyrics. So... is this a genre of it's own? Because to me it sounds just like "western" Alternative Rock, except for the language of course :-)

If you want (or due to lacking support by the original charter, have to) edit something within a CDLC, there is always the option to unpack it with the EOF Toolkit, load up all the single parts in EOF, add the sections that you need, and repack everything. I think it does work, even though I havn't tried it yet myself. So while it doesn't mean to "mess with code", there is still some effort necessary. Did you chart a CDLC on your own yet? I would definitely recommend making one from scratch on your own first, in order to understand how everything works. Yeah, I'm dreaming about that, too... Furthermore: "Intro", "verse" etc. will only appear in Tab-Explorer if the charter created the sections with those names in the first place.

Despite all the negative comments and my own initial feelings about the intermediate song, after figuring it out, I liked to play it. Don't know if I'll have time for an update tomorrow, so at least I'm not too late this week :-) Intermediate Lead: 95.17 % http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=291218366

Alright sry for beeing so unspecific, I was wondering what happens with a longer TAB. This is just your section extended with a couple of copies. It looks fine as long as it's all in one line and you can scroll to the right, but looks horrible here: e|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------| B|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------| G|------0-----2-----|--0-----------0---|----0-----0-----0-|------0-----2-----|--0-----------0---|----0-----0-----0-|------0-----2-----|--0-----------0---|----0-----0-----0-|------0-----2-----|--0-----------0---|----0-----0-----0-|------0-----2-----|--0-----------0---|----0-----0-----0-|------0-----2-----|--0-----------0---|----0-----0-----0-| D|----2-----0-----0-|------------0-----|--0-----4-----4---|----2-----0-----0-|------------0-----|--0-----4-----4---|----2-----0-----0-|------------0-----|--0-----4-----4---|----2-----0-----0-|------------0-----|--0-----4-----4---|----2-----0-----0-|------------0-----|--0-----4-----4---|----2-----0-----0-|------------0-----|--0-----4-----4---| A|------------------|----------3-----3-|------3-----3-----|------------------|----------3-----3-|------3-----3-----|------------------|----------3-----3-|------3-----3-----|------------------|----------3-----3-|------3-----3-----|------------------|----------3-----3-|------3-----3-----|------------------|----------3-----3-|------3-----3-----| E|--0-----2-----3---|------------------|------------------|--0-----2-----3---|------------------|------------------|--0-----2-----3---|------------------|------------------|--0-----2-----3---|------------------|------------------|--0-----2-----3---|------------------|------------------|--0-----2-----3---|------------------|------------------| If there are no line brakes, then it will be an aweful lot of work to add them by hand... Also: Does it show special techniques, like hammer on / pull off, slides and such things? :-)

Thank you very much! I would just have never imagined that it costs 2984,10 $ per year to keep such a site running. Thats a quite a lot of money! On the other hand, with 37852 Members, thats only 8 Cent per Member and Year :-)

Nice! Since the Tab Explorer does not support printing, I was wondering if this function could be an alternative to that program. But is it already layouted for printing on e.g. A4 paper? I don't have any .dat songs, so I can't test it. Maybe the devs will implement support for psarc at some point in the future :-)

You can already sort by a second parameter if you shift-click the second column. It's explained in the "Notes (click to expand)"

I am curious: What does the ASCI Tab look like? Is it comfortable for printing?

After all, it's really easy: In EOF: Scroll to the position you want to have the switch at: idealy not exactly on the first note with the new tone, but a little bit before. Otherwise the note might get chopped of or something and in reality you would hit your pedal right before you play the next note as well.Go to Track->Rocksmith->Tone Change->AddGive it a name. Careful: The name must be one from the Tone Name dropdown menu you find in the Toolkit under Edit Tone. The same names will be associated to another.Repeat for all tone changesUnder Track->Rocksmith->Tone Change->Names you can (and maybe must) define the default tone.Your default tone should be added @ position 0 secondsIn the Toolkit Make sure the tone names are the same as used in EOFUnder edit arrangement select the tones (base should be the default tone, I think)I had to check the box "disable tone slot changes...", otherwise my CDLC wouldn't startdone, I guess :-)Good luck :-)

I remember that you, @@Unleashed2k, tried to keep a list with every single expense in the very beginning of this site, and that it was just too much work to keep that up to date. But if you listed only the donoation goals, that would be less work, right? It would be sweet to get acces to such an overview of the donation goals from the past. Maybe divided in "one-time investments" and "continuus payments". This way we could see what it actually costs per year to keep a site like this alive, and what has been put into improving the service, hence increasing the transparency. Don't get me wrong, in my opinion the donation goal system itself is already quite transparent. And I will accept if you say that this is too much work as well. But I like the idea to see how much this community spends on this site in total numbers. :-)

Nice! Thanks Devs!

Intermediate Lead: 87 % http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=288410487 My exam period has started, so I have waaaaaaay too less time to practise :-( PS: And I guess I'm too late... well, my score wasn't great anyway...

... Now I'm getting tired, too... this question pops up at least once per day, I guess... 1) Did you use the search function to find a solution for your problem? 2) Did you follow the tutorial on how to use CDLC? (means did you install the .dll and do you own cherub rock?) 3) Do other CDLCs work? If yes, the problem is specific to your CDLC and has to be fixed by the charter ... So #3 is probably the case. What do the comments on that song say, do others experience the same problem? A straight line means that the charter did not include dynamic difficulty. If you want to add it yourself, you can do that with one click with the Toolkit: http://customsforge.com/forum/56-rocksmith-custom-tool-kit/

Just putting my +1 on this request. What is problematic is that I have to use my browsers "previous page" button to start a new search when my last one brought no results. That is extremly uncomfortable! ... but maybe this topic should be placed in the tracker forum :-)

Did you try to play different Custom DLCs? Unfornuately, there are a few CDLC out there that won't start correctly. Your problem is a known bug, it just happens sometimes. Please try some other CDLC. And read the comments for your CDLC to see if others are complaining about the same problem!

Calm down please, this is not the place to be offended or offend others. If you read that line like "Provide print capability of tabs which are included in PSARC files" the sentence makes perfectly sense. But to get back to topic: Even though I support the initial idea, I must admit that the total feedback / number of supporters of the idea does not really seem sufficient at the moment. Nevertheless we can collect ideas for additional feature of Rocksmith-related software. If we end up with a reasonable amount of things on the list, we can start thinking about how to integrate it into this site in a more functional way (maybe the revamped song request system will give us some ideas as well :-))

I think we can all agree that we desperately want the ability to set a gobal value of 100% DD ingame, just like master mode can be turned on and off. (As someone mentioned before.) Then everyone could include DD (thanks to the awesome DDC), and those who don't like it would still not be offended by its presence. Is there a "useful" way to contact the developer studio to request such a feature as a patch or for the next release of Rocksmith? If so, we should write them lots of mails :-)

I like dynamic difficulty very much for the following reasons: - Seeing how difficult the parts of the song are in the top of the screen is nice to have - It looks better! In a song without DD I always feel uncomfortable because of that unesthetic straight line in the top - It's great when you want to get to know a new song withouht beeing overwhelmed by it's complexity. - Also, lately I found myself trying to fill the gaps in the notes (due to lower DD) on my own, just by listening. When I found out that I was right, that was really cool! When you really want to learn the whole of a song in the shortest possible time, of course in terms of effectivity it's best to set the difficulty to 100 % and accelarate every part on it's own until you play it perfectly. BUT there is an important difference between effectivity and motivation. - I feel like a lot of advanced players tend to forget what it feels like when you're a beginner. There is simply no chance you can play that song on 100 % difficulty - no way - it will just be frustrating. When you are at this stage, dynamic difficulty is super important for your motivation! When I played Rocksmith for the first time, I fired up "The Trooper" by Iron Maiden. And even though I would only play every 20th note or whatever, I felt like a superstar. It was awesome, just rocking along to the music. This feeling is extremely important for the motivation, and it's something that is unique to Rocksmith (you cannot to it with TABs)! The last point is my most important one, and the reason why I think everyone should include DD in their CDLCs.

@@Wepeel What you say are all valid points! To clarify, the motivation for my proposal is the idea that a potential developer could be attracted by the fact that the money he would get is already raised. Then the motivation for a detailed cost brake-down might be higher... Also, I thought it might be problematic to refund all the money to lots of people. And I don't see no problem if the donators agree to this procedure upon donating. If not used, the money should go into the next donation goal CF is creating anyway (e.g. regular fees, I agree that it shouldn't be allowed to be just "anything") I see one additional problem though: The developers of EOF, Toolkit etc. are already putting lots of time into their awesome tools, without receiving any monetary credit. And now we're giving money to someone else just because noone wanted to do that project... it seems a bit unfair.