You consider auto-tune cheating?  How wide spread do you think? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Rick Law
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 01:15:17 am
content: I was listening to some old vocal music. It occur to me, those are real voices! The volume, the fullness of the voice, the breath of nodes the singer can carry... That was what that singer can really do.With modern electronics, "auto-tune" must be a lot better. Doing it on-the-fly would likely no longer be discernible. "Cher effect" is for all practical purpose as long ago as "Sonny and Cher". Now you really don't know if the singer can really carry that node, or is it just pure electronics at work. (Amplification aside.)Wikipedia has a list of those who refuse to use "auto-tune" and those known to use it. I think it is probably in much wider use than we know. May be.You consider that cheating as I do? For well known performers, how wild spread do you think auto-tune (or similar) is used these days?

author: ataradov
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 01:33:16 am
content: Using auto-tune for additional effects (Cher) is fine in all cases, IMO. It is not cheating, since it makes something new possible.Using auto-tune for improving your voice and have it unnoticeable, only works if your are pretty close anyway. And I personally have no problems with that either. If it makes the end result sound better and more enjoyable, why not?

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 01:54:45 am
content: Auto-tune was originally meant to repair minor defects in vocals. It is often used to do the opposite and cause frequency distortion for electronic music.If someone has to use it to fake the whole song because they suck and can't sing and go and make it sound perfect, then yes, they are disgusting fakes. They are the same people that lip-sync concerts. Yes, they have live auto-tune now, so they could probably fake that too.If they can't sing through an analog amp, then they are garbage. We don't want to have to do like Barney Fife and turn your mic off while someone else sings behind the curtain.Some instruments even have auto-tune.EDIT: Post-processing auto-tune can go pretty far. Live can't obviously, hence the lip-sync fakers.

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 02:04:49 am
content: Quote from: Cyberdragon on March 15, 2018, 01:54:45 amI kinda feel the same way, but then have a think about how many famous musos always sounded better on the record because some/most/all of the instruments were being played by session musicians (or these days sequencers).I kinda feel the same way about the latest ELO/Jeff Lynn stuff where he has re-recorded the music mostly himself to be what he always wanted it to be and without the imperfections of the other musicians he had around him (necessarily at the time). Technically perfect but completely devoid of soul or feeling and boring as batshit to listen to.Music is supposed to have imperfections, that's what makes it feel human rather than sequenced.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 03:18:58 am
content: Cyberdragon pretty much wrapped it up as it isand beat me to itIt's one thing to add an effect with Autotune like the old school Vocorders and Pitch Shifters etc, usually implemented by genuine artists and recording studio personel,for creative come enhancement reasonsbut the talentless can't sing for s*** losers in the last 10 years put on the highest pop/rock pedestals are making making serious cashThey can't hold a note to save their lives and their constant 24/7 BS is creating a 'dumbing down' of the publics music appreciation,as well as making it next to impossible for talented people to make a dollar, much less be seen and heard.It should be a criminal offence promoting such garbage, especially the stoopid videos that go with this crap,and all unscrupulous 'can't sing' Autotuned slackers put to work bagging doggie do in parks and nature strips to earn money...assuming they can get that right is a major leap of faith btw

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 03:39:45 am
content: It's only cheating if you're defining a game with rules. However I do think it contributes to the dehumanisation of music. By which I mean, you remove "imperfect" elements of music and timbre.In fact, in the realm of music production, people apply a lot of effort into "humanising" sampled and synthesised instruments. The human brain is very quick to catch onto patterns, and identical note timbres rapidly become predictable and boring for the listener.In the types of music generally being referred to here, the production process and timeframe lends itself to producing production-line type music. Music that is highly quantised in terms of pitch and rhythm, not to mention harmony and phrasing.Spending additional time adding human nuance to these elements would deliver a composition that is much more intriguing to the ear, but is unlikely to happen if you only have less than a week to churn out the next pop piece.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 04:05:36 am
content: It's not about music sounding electronicly perfect. It's about people using it to just blurt words and having the computer sing for them and making money. That's just!Plus, time means nothing. If you look at Wintergaten, he says sometimes he makes a song in less then a day, yet they sound fine. You could do alot with professional team in a week. Maybe that's the problem, modern production teams are also crap.

author: maukka
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 09:36:25 am
content: It's pretty crazy what they can do these days. Not auto-tune but probably very similar in practice.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 09:47:03 am
content: The AutoChurned crap spinners today have lost the plot and it all sounds like "Oink Oink Oink Baybee..." on the radio and anywhere and everywhere when one goes shoppingA pair of untrained pigs would be more pleasing to the earIf these 'Yo B!tches' peddlers can't sing they should POFF and let people that can sing LIVE (for real) record real tunes, and just do multiple takes (overdubs) if they make a mistakeor to double up and do harmonies etc SIMPLE AS PIE for anyone with a bar of talentReal singers don't need Autotune running through the entire tune (chooon) set to '20' and on the sampled and looped instruments tooThe musically challenged clueless suckers that buy into this fake pop moozik and get fleeced at overpriced concerts to listen to lip syncing are tragic, wasting their hard earned cashThis garbage has been nuking the airwaves and polluting our ears for about 20 years,25 too many I reckonand yes it is straight up CHEATING, on too many levels

author: Harb
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 09:48:07 am
content: Its about the same as an ATU on your antenna system.....

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 09:56:08 am
content: Quote from: ataradov on March 15, 2018, 01:33:16 amI agree. It's the end result which matters, in my opinion. I knew this would be a controversial subject, with lots of people hating auto-tune, but I wonder how many can really tell the difference? If I like a song, tune, beat, I like it, whether it's real or fake is immaterial.

author: Psi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 10:12:18 am
content: If using auto-tune is cheating then so is using a power tool to make furniture.Just saying,Quote from: Hero999 on March 15, 2018, 09:56:08 amexactly

author: CJay
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 10:22:15 am
content: Autotune and post recording 'repair' of crap vocals has been around for a *long* time, Stock, Aitken and Waterman used similar technologies a lot back in the 80s, it just so happens that some of the artists they had could actually sing (and sounded better live than on recordings).I don't mind it if it's used to bring something new to the arena but it's often used to patch up 'singers' who couldn't carry a tune in a bucket, the nice thing about that is that the most obvious auto tune users 'make' music that is disposable pap and very unlikely to cross my ears.I don't regard it as cheating on a recording, post production mixing makes a huge difference, everyone has a recording engineer and tries to make the best of studio versions but for a 'live' performance, yeah, it's a giant red flag indicator of a lack of talent and something similar to fraud, those who lipsync 'live' yet claim to be 'artists' are lying to their fans and beneath contempt.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 09:48:52 pm
content: Quote from: Psi on March 15, 2018, 10:12:18 amA furniture maker can make furniture with any tool, power or manualI wouldn't give any form of tool to todays pop arstits, especially to make furnitureQuote from: Hero999 on March 15, 2018, 09:56:08 amThat's not the way I roll, I hope I'm not aloneor good music and genuine talent is doomed to dieand repetitive monotonous kool-aid flavored chipmunk moozik produced by talentless monkeys masquerading as a 'music industry' will prevail

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 10:07:59 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on March 15, 2018, 09:48:52 pmDoes it matter? Lots of hand crafts have virtually vanished completely, thanks to modern manufacturing processes.If singing becomes an obsolete skill, I couldn't care less. It still takes talent to write good lyrics, a tune and a beat, which I think is far more important.

author: Terry01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 10:21:16 pm
content: I know there are loads who use auto-tune but you get to know who can sing and who can really sing. I think those who have it let rip now and then just to make sure we know they can do it, those who can't try.The thing is too though some people make more out of making an arse of themselves trying to sing when they clearly cant than those who clearly can sing.

author: AlfBaz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 11:09:11 pm
content: In my past life as a muso I had the privilege of hearing some seriously talented singers at rehearsals. They would sing a tune unaccompanied and without fail there was this visceral feeling of awe that I have yet to experience elsewhere.It was extremely difficult to convey this on stage and even more difficult on a recorded medium.Undoubtedly this was mostly due to my lack of production skills but there is a certain amount of intimacy that is lost in the process regardlessSports seems to be an area where aid of any kind is frowned upon as the general consensus is that the general population wants to see people, not unlike themselves, achieving amazing feats.It's the human connection that some of us valueIf we become complacent with "alternatives" to human connection then let's see where that ends up, we are already seeing freakazoids espousing the virtues of rooting robots

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 15, 2018, 11:37:57 pm
content: Autotune is terrible, it is one more tool to disassociate talent from, well, talent. The contemporary music business is not completely different than it was 4 decades ago, the industry and public has always preferred the pretty and the weird, but these days that is all that maters. The industry brings in a few new people every year and the number of talented people that are overlooked is staggering. With tools like Autotune they need not settle for the fairly pretty girl with a great real voice -- they can market the gorgeous girl with modest talent and compensate with tools like Autotune.There are other trends in the industry and it's useful to see where we were and contrast that with where we are. Back in the day talented musicians would BAND together and they would record and tour as a band. Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, ZZ Top, etc. These days they still have bands but no one knows who the guitarist is or the drummer or bassist -- the band takes the name of the singer who receives all the attention and the lions share of the money. These modern era of music has devalued actual musical talent to the point where the actual musicians are audio burger flippers. Autotune is part of this and its bad!Brian

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 12:06:45 am
content: A lot of modern music is fully electronic with nothing but synths (even replacing real instruments). There's nothing wrong with electronic music. As someone who dabbles in synth music, it's not always that simple and "talent-less", it's just a different set of skills. That would be like saying modern programmers are "talent-less" compared to someone who used the old manually programmed mainframe computers.The real problem is those awful singers getting rich and famous.

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 03:48:24 am
content: I think I can explain a lot of the revulsion: there is a divide in perception between music as an end product and music as a result of the artistry and skill of the musician. People tend to respect talent and accomplishment because it takes practice and only a small % of people attain that skill in a given area. So when we see an artificial process reproducing the same results we tend to see that as a "cheating" of the system.Hence why people get upset when we see athletes take drugs to enhance their performance. However, in the case of sports, the rules are strict and the skill of the athlete is considered an end goal in itself. Is music a competition?Music can and does mean many different things to people. It can be calming, it can make you nostalgic, or it can impress you with technicality and complexity. In my experience, the contentious types of music or artists alluded to here in this thread, are popularnotbecause of a universal respect for musical prowess. But, I can't say that isn't a valid appreciation or experience of music. Afterall, there are no rules. Sometimes people just want to sing along with something simple.It's not like I don't have a vested interest in changing that either. I am a professional muso who has spent the 10's of thousands of hours practising, and one who does scoff at most popular music I hear, due to it's apparent shallowness.But at the end of the day, it's hard for me to say all these auto-tuned artists who use the technology as a crutch didn't earn their position. Big business has grown around these cult-of-personality singers because as a society, so many people gave them money and attention for doing what they do.If that doesn't sit well with you, I think we will be in agreement, but ultimately you will have to accept that only a small % of the population will have an appreciation for the finer elements of music.It reminds me of why I like youtube over TV. I enjoy watching EEVblog videos, or independent car reviewers for example. But you know if they were interpreted to a TV program, it would be dumbed down for mass consumption. Maybe quality and substance correlate inversely to mass appeal......

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 04:58:37 am
content: Music certainly is a competition...for fame and money. Big sports are too. That's why people get mad when people cheat. Cheaters can take that "win" away for people with real talent because they appear artifically better. Do you think any big artist who can't sing worth crap would survive with a career if they tried to sing to a huge audience through an unfiltered mic? The crowd, and the internet, would tar and feather them in seconds (if they're really bad that is). If someone can't sing, can't play an instrument, and can't even make synth music, then they are nothing but a mascot for the production company, yet they get all the fame and fortune. Sure, they might have other talents, but they aren't real musicians. (Songwriters are they're own thing, that would fall under poet or composer.)It's not whether we should hate them as a person or hate their music, it's about who should be credited as a "musician".If I made some music by running a Speak-N-Spell through auto-tune, does that make it a musician? No...I, the producer, am the real musician.EDIT: It's a vicious circle too. People won't stop liking certain music, and if that happens to support fake musicians, then they'll take advantage of it. The other problem is people with real talent don't often make cheap music, so there's no one else to satisfy people who like that kind of music.We could always replace them with Speak-N-Spells...(Waiting for people to complain I'm "too mean")EDIT: Let's call them "music mascots" then.

author: ruairi
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 05:48:17 am
content: I've worked full-time in the music business for 24 years so I come at it from a different perspective. Back when I was a recording engineer I have spent many years of my life tuning vocals "by hand", using pitch manipulation to tune individual notes by ear to the track.My recommendation is to find music that moves you, music that makes you feel something. If you are a middle aged man that will likely sound different to what moves a 12 year old girl.There are phenomenal songs out their that use vocal tuning both for repair and for effect and there are lots of truly awful purist acoustic recordings too. The tools used do not determine the outcome.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 06:31:53 am
content: Quote from: ruairi on March 16, 2018, 05:48:17 amThe tools used do not determine the outcome -- then why use them?Brian

author: ruairi
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 07:54:37 am
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on March 16, 2018, 06:31:53 amSeriously? Because theycontributeto the outcome,influencethe outcome,shapethe outcome.Tunes vocals (or not) do not determine whether a piece of music is good , enjoyable, emotionally engaging etc. It is window dressing.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 08:57:40 am
content: Quote from: Cyberdragon on March 16, 2018, 04:58:37 amI can see your point about calling someone a musician, when they're really not, but the meanings of various words become corrupted over time, so what's the problem?Strictly speaking, performer is probably a better term for the word. Contemporary pop stars can still dance and put on a good performance. They may not be the best vocalists or instrumentalists, but they're still good performers.I also think lots of the music from the 60s, 70s and 80s was really bad. I've been listening to lots of it recently and have come to the conclusion that older people think it was better, because it's what they grew up with.Looking good and being able to perform has always been more important, than being able to play an instrument or sing well. It's true, performance has become more important, since the advent of firstly TV, followed by MTV and now Vivo and Youtube. Good vocalists and musicians have often been overlooked, in favour of those who can perform.What I really can't stand and do hate is music snobbery and there's lots of it in this thread.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 10:06:00 am
content: It can be fine to correct some minor mistakes. If you abuse, of course, the music will sound too perfect and will become boring.I am the sound guy at a jazz club and I remember I have told some musicians that their records were a bit boring while their performances were briliant. The problem? Many musicians (maybe this affecs especially jazz musicians) are somewhat scared of the "final" nature of a recording. Once it's been recorded it's set on stone and you will be judged by it.I remember a great Spanish trumpet player with awesome improvisation skills. Just playing in a trio he is amazing (I have had him on stage several times). When he released his first record he had added more instruments and it was just too elaborate to the point of sounding "wimpy". The same guy on stage can be pretty wild improvising.I suggested him to just record a live concert and release it the next time. Even with the typical concert recording problems (a cough or two, glassware sounds in small venue recordings, etc) live recordings are great.And it can be worse. I've been told that some well known classical music performers take obsession to the extreme, demanding editing to the individual bar level. Insane!It's a pity not all concerts are recorded. I remember a really wild concert with The Fringe. I asked them for permission to record (I always do of course!). They didn't want it because of a rights problem, so I didn't. After the concert, which was insanely wild and awesome (one of the very best concerts in my life) apart from the fact that even with a minimal intervention policy I was really spent (lots of very subtle corrections!) they asked me "hey, how did the recording turn out?" and of course I hadn't done it because they didn't give me permission.So, well, next time!

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 12:29:48 pm
content: Quote from: maukka on March 15, 2018, 09:36:25 amNot that similar. Melodyne is a really amazing piece of software. Its far more sophisticated than auto tune. You can play a bum note in a chord on a guitar, let melodyne break down the individual notes of the chord, fix the one bum note, and end up with something super smooth and natural sounding.

author: CJay
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 12:38:33 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on March 16, 2018, 08:57:40 amAnd so the wheel turns, it's always been that way, nostalgia for an imagined past influences so many people to believe it was 'better in my day' and it will continue to be so, despite what the majority of people would like to think of themselves.Most of the legendary music from the 60s and 70s was technically dreadful, the Beatles in my opinion are a great example of right image, right time, right place, the music itself could be argued to have been only a contributor to their success, they managed, with Epstein's help, to be one of the biggest groups ever, but if you take a critical stare at their music you can shred it, it's still selling though, fifty years later?Conversely, a lot of the synth pop is technically perfect, computers made it so the beat was exact, the notes were pitch perfect etc. but it sounds 'wrong' because we as humans expect imperfection and when something is as close to perfect as possible, it sounds or looks odd so, music doesn't on some level is about more than the audio, it has to be about the performance, the image of the performer, even the hysteria of the fans because that's also infectious.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 03:11:06 pm
content: Prefence for old music by percent in era60s 5-10%70s 1%80s 40-50%Performence is subjective to culture, they can have terrible performances compared to a lot of others and as long the people have marketing and culture shoved down their throats they'll like it. Of course, there is still a fine line of tolerance, things like wardrobe malfunctions will cause hysteria.

author: alexanderbrevig
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 03:46:14 pm
content: Auto-tune is something different than pitch correction.My brother actually wrote his master thesis on this topicBeing a musician and trying to live off it is nearly impossible, people expect studio recording but won't buy them. So, instead of doing 20 takes to get everything perfect, the better solution is to do three takes and fix with cutting and pitch correction. Less $ wasted is always a good thing.I personally do cringe when people use pitch correction live, but they get an audience so all the power to them! Auto-tune as an effect is always OK to me, but very rarely I find it favorable.What I feel about it has no impact on anything so I just smile and carry on.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 04:08:31 pm
content: Music as known today have been on a degenerating path for decades...

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 04:21:15 pm
content: Quote from: alexanderbrevig on March 16, 2018, 03:46:14 pmAuto-tune is pitch correction. Perhaps what you meant is its not the same as speeding up or slowing down the original to adjust the picture. Solutions like auto-tine maintain the formant structure of the voice, the rhythm, etc, and only change the pitch of the note being said or sung.

author: John B
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 07:12:23 pm
content: So, this might be a good place to bring up that whole Fergie american anthem thing. When it was buzzing all over social media, I was expected to see some trainwreck performance. Maybe some performer who has relied on autotune their career and is now in a live situation.To my surprise, I like the interpretation and couldn't see what the giant fuss was about.I couldn't even ascertain what exactly people were unhappy about. But if I had to guess I would say it's about the fluid tempo, fluid pitch (ie the human voice rarely sits exactly on one pitch for a "note"), vibrato and vocal timbral nuances. Other than that, some people found the interpretation "disrespectful" to an anthem. However I won't deal with that claim.At least to me it seemed like an indication of what has been lost from the public concious in terms of musical diversity. It was a live human vocal performance and was miles away from a "trainwreck" performance.However the cynic in me feels that there was also a whiff of manufacture-versy around the whole issue. People (and news articles) jumped on a bandwagon saying how terrible it was without ever really articulating why.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 09:14:37 pm
content: Auto-tune is just another tool in the kit.Is it cheating any more than using compression to even out a vocal performance or to fatten up a bass guitar line?Is it cheating any more than overdubbing guitar lines, which makes a trio sound like there are four guitarists? (I'm thinking of Led Zeppelin's "Ten Years Gone," specifically here.)Is it cheating any more than punching in to fix flubbed notes? Or comping vocal tracks, sometimes phrase by phrase, to get one complete track?Is it cheating any more than recording cymbals separately from the rest of the kit? Or using Wendel Jr to replace drum sounds?Is it cheating any more than hiring a session drummer instead of using the band's drummer? Or indeed replacing the entire band with session players (uh, Urge Overkill's "Exit The Dragon")?Remember, music production is always done in service of the Song. The "Song" is what the artist envisions and it is the result of the work that goes into making it that vision a reality.No doubt that some production decisions can distract and detract from the Song. One imagines that in retrospect, some artists might say, "I wish we hadn't done that," like mastering a record to the point where it has no dynamic range and is distorted to hell. Or maybe that awful 80s drum sound (which ruined the Stevie Ray Vaughan records) has to go.If the Song itself is good, it can be performed in all sorts of different arrangements and instrumentations, and it will still be good. Maybe we should just say, "This is a great song!"But I suppose that a lot of what passes for "Pop Music" these days are simply not good Songs. I hear too much of it -- in the morning before classes start at my son's elementary school, the PE teacher plays that stuff over the sound system while the kids jump rope and get their ya-yas out. "Imagine Dragons? I imagine dragons being slain! These kids need to hear the Ramones!"

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 10:15:17 pm
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on March 16, 2018, 09:14:37 pmIs it cheating any more than using compression -- YES!Is it cheating any more than overdubbing guitar lines -- YES!Is it cheating any more than punching in to fix flubbed notes -- YES!Is it cheating any more than hiring a session drummer instead of using the band's drummer -- YES!All these other techniques require the actual performance be performed by an actual musician. Yes, we all make mistakes and in the recording studio you have the option to redo things when they need to be. Even the best musician requires practice and everyone make mistakes in practice.I've said this before but I guess I have to repeat myself...When talent is passed over for someone with better looks or a better gimmick a better talent goes to waste. The industry compensates with technology to raise the mediocre talent to "appear" more capable and the industry rots from within. And, as I mentioned before, the other trend that goes along hat in hand with the above is the reduction in importance of actual musicianship as artists with a single name replace bands with musicians that people know by name. Who's Taller Swifts guitarist or drummer -- I haven't a clue and it's as likely the guitarist now is not the same as the last album or tour. Both of these trends have been proceeding apace for decades so it's not fair to say this began yesterday -- it didn't. When the industry wants is "acts" that have an arc of a few years to a decade or so and then some crop rotation brings in new acts using the same formula. This color-by-number approach works like this:Look for really pretty girls in there mid teens that have a passable enough voice that can be augmented with tech. MARKET this TEEN and ride the train for a decade or, in most cases, just a few years. RINSE -- REPEAT!There's room in here for real musical talent, of course, but the musician is a bit player these days and is seen as contract labor to be replaced at the whim of the artist or label. Song writers fare a bit better and recording engineering is actually better off as they play a bigger role in tweaking the sound, even creating the sound.Brian

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 11:07:25 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on March 15, 2018, 09:56:08 amAnd then live concerts become fake performance without actual live music. Because singers just can't do their shit.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 16, 2018, 11:52:15 pm
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on March 16, 2018, 10:15:17 pmI repeat, how is that any different now, than 50 years ago?Who were the bass guitarist and drummer in The Temptations? I doubt it was the same backing musicians playing in their classic tracks, probably different people played My Girl, than Just my imagination, running away with me. No doubt there were plenty of more talented singers around at the time, but they were overlooked, because they weren't so good performers.Nothing has really changed. Technology has moved on, but performance has always trumped talent.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 12:51:52 am
content: Performance implies they have a talent to perform with. If they're lip syncing, they aren't performing any better than a machine.If preformers are having machines sing for them, have perfectly coreographed cheap and plastic dances, and no improvisation or humanity...we might as well replace them with robots! Then you wouldn't have to feed them!

author: floobydust
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 02:37:59 am
content: I'm repairing gear in a recording studio, and a producer and sound engineer are trying to mix a song with a terrible singer. They shake their heads and give up, even though they have multiple takes of the same song to cut'n'paste snippets where she's in-tune.I asked them about using auto-tune, and they said it's beyond that, her timing is way off and her pitch is all over the place. The time to edit it would be just too much and still end up with poor results.Even though they're paid by the hour, they say "no" to using it. Some performers are musicians and some are entertainers.Modern pop recordings have perfect timing, with midi-quantization and vocals DSP processed excessively.I listened to Taylor Swift's music and I can barely tell a human being is singing, it's so over-produced.In the 50-60-70-80's music was not about being computer perfect (timing, pitch). It had a raw, human feel with expression in timing and pitch nuances. Frank Sinatra smooth, or Robert Plant wailing - those were talented musicians, not bubble gum pop entertainers entirely propped up with auto-tune.Auto-tune is pretty much like cosmetics, makeup on your voice.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 02:56:45 am
content: Quote from: Hero999 on March 16, 2018, 11:52:15 pmAs I've said before and will repeat again the game that's being played isn't new -- the difference is that while 50 years ago half the music was composed with un-named session musicians now it's more like 90%. Also, back then many of the un-named session musicians would go one to form BANDS. Guys like Jimmy Page did a lot of session work but he also formed Led Zeppelin. Today there are few options for BANDS as the industry has little interest in them. There are, of course, bands today but they have largely been marginalized by file sharing etc. Today the money is in touring and the industry prefers the pretty and the weird over actual talent.So, these same themes were at work 50 years ago and today they dominate to the exclusion of talent!Brian

author: lordvader88
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 03:54:38 am
content: There's a whole genre of hip-hop I think, but IDK what it's called, but its CRAP. It's all auto-tune bling/club music aimed at 12yo wanna-be gangters, and it's listened to by lots of 40yo's too, and they think they are so tough, listening to these douche bag crap rappers.It's utter garbage on most all levels. Brainwashing crap is all it is.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 04:19:35 am
content: Oh yeah... let's not get started on those deadass hip hop gangsta rappaz with dropped pants (full nappy) Yo YosDisgusting creatures, end of storyThey need AutoDumpster not AutoTuneBack to CHEATING:If they used session musos back in the day on recordings, it's because 'time was money' and producers did not want stoned artists doing take after take after taketo get the track right and ready for mixdown, release, flogged on the radio, and book tours to help recuperate invested cash, and pay back loans and not lose the house !Many artists could play the parts and most did LIVE without the recording studio "getting it right" pressure,some pop toyboys actually took lessons from pros so they could deliver the goods on stage and better themselves without the dud vibe hovering overheadThat said, today's totally talentless hicks and former street criminals and thugs dribbling into microphones, cranking the Aurotune to maximum levels, being paraded as 'mainstream come latest thang'and making big cash are basically CHEATINGThey are an insult to the concept of real music, shafting real musicians and vocalists out of any form of future prospects, be they fame or fortune or to pay the rent.What they produce from looped samples, drag and drop files, and tons of Autotuned cheating is somewhat 'appealing noise' to a dumbed down generation that would not suspect they are being taken,basically robbed of their entertainment dollars, convinced it's 'music' and following their herded youth peers to fit in sociallyTheir so called 'recording engineers' (unemployable roadies, dealers, entourage creeps) are just as low for assisting in this fraudulent activity with a -Use By Date- already 20 years overdueApologists playing the 'age' cardplease try another angle, otherwise classical and jazz music* as examples would have not made it this far,anyone young and not so young can embrace and appreciate it today.Who will be listening to the Autotuned 'oink oink' racket in 50 years time... without belly laughing?*Classical and jazz music doesn't need a cheater bar to firmly clamp peoples attention

author: DimitriP
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 05:23:23 am
content: QuoteSmall topic diversion:I had hoped over the years that Jeff Lynne would pull his/their head out of his ass and "put the band back together".Instead he come up with the abomination that is Jeff Lynne's ELO of today.Jeff Lynne's post original ELO is Fisher of the 80s and 90s, JBL and altec lansing of the 21st century.He re-recorded the music " to be what he always wanted it to be". I call bullshit.He needed to sell the new recordings. So he said what he needed to say.Just because I have the rights to use the name "duck" i can't take a camel and call it duck.He has the rights to the ELO name. He could hire Laurie Berkener record "I'm a litttle frog" and call lit ELO. Well, it's not. Ever.His head is apparently still firmly stuck at the same place.I still have the original recordings and blast them in the car daily....and here I'll stop before I let anyone know how I really feel ....(Mr. Blue Sky playing on the Advents in the backround )

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 05:37:24 am
content: Quote from: DimitriP on March 17, 2018, 05:23:23 amI don't really think Jeff *needs* to sell anything. I honestly think he has the revisionist disease that also got George Lucas whereby "the original vision was never as good as what I intended it to be, so I'll go and revise it until I'm happy with it, fans be damned". I honestly believe he thinks what he is doing is an improvement. And I suppose there are people out there who think that enough to buy it.Opinions are quite personal however and I am under no illusion that anyone else shares mine (or needs to).I had a copy of the "50th anniversary Cliff & The Shadows" album where they re-recorded a whole heap of the classics. Unfortunately this time around they were all in separate parts of the world obviously recording to a click track, and again technically perfect and completely devoid of feeling, expression and soul. I deliberately left the CD in the last car I sold to ensure I was never tempted to try to listen to it in the event I started to look back with rose tinted glasses.It's the imperfections in the originals that made them what they are. The obvious energy you can "feel" when you listen to the music knowing the musicians are all in their little parts of the studio bouncing off each other. I feel the same way about the Bon Scott era AC/DC stuff. It's full of flaws, which is what makes it so good. The first 2 or 3 chords of Highway to Hell make the hair on the back of my neck stand up. That absolute raw mix of overdriven harmonics combined with Malcolms chord phrasing that just makes me smile. I've played guitar for 30 years now and I've never managed to get a sound that comes close to the reaction I get when listening to those chords.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 06:01:16 am
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on March 16, 2018, 10:15:17 pmYou seem to confuse “pop music shows” with concerts. Taylor Swift and all of that ilk are performers, not musicians, and their performances are not what we think of when we go see a rock band play a show.You’re not the target demographic. So whether you think it sucks and is not “real music” is utterly beside the point. I’m not the target demographic, either, and I want the kids whoarethe target to listen to real music, too, but the argument about “not real music” is as old as popular music. Hell, the jazz snobs look at indie rock and go “what the fuck is that noise?” and the classical music snobs look at the be-boppers and go “what the fuck is that noise?”I look at it this way. A friend who is a top-shelf live music front-of-house mixer did a tour as monitor engineer for the Jonas Brothers. They’re three teenage boys fronting a group of top (but anonymous) touring musicians. Did he stop to consider what that meant for his serious punk rock cred? Fuck no — the paycheck took care of that, especially when the high-cred bands he was working for found themselves on the back end of their career arc and as such could no longer afford him. And anyway, those tours employ alotof crew, as in an FOH mixer, a monitor mixer, a Pro Tools rig jockey, a handful of backline techs, not to mention lighting and other crew. Sure, they were entertaining teenagers, but they were all well paid to do it, and besides, teens need to be entertained too, especially because the drinking age prevents them from getting into the punk rock clubs.

author: Bassman59
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 06:03:28 am
content: Quote from: wraper on March 16, 2018, 11:07:25 pmThey’re not concerts, they’re performances. Singing (some), dancing, flashy light show, music playback. Go see the symphony if you want a concert.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 06:48:48 am
content: Quote from: Bassman59 on March 17, 2018, 06:01:16 amNot confused for a second about what pop music is or that it's been around since forever. In fact, the Beatles were in the earliest incarnation, a pop band. It's not so much the genre as the trend in the ENTIRE INDUSTRY!It's really quite simple -- when talent is relegated to being the nameless faceless folks that work in the background to make the music, color by number style, while lesser talents with a hook garner all the attention and the lions sharer of the money the consequence is a devaluation of talent and ultimately ... music itself. In the end music suffers and music is important -- too important to let this continue. Arguing that the way things are is somehow OK because, reasons, is pathetic!Miley Cyrus made more money in one year peddling nothing than just about all real musical acts combined. What's really sad about Miley is that she actually has a pretty decent voice if you like them raspy, and I often do. Yes, she's a pop act but more than anything she's an act. Her act, like many others like her, is more pantomime than music, but I guess if that's what floats your boat.Lastly, although I'm no fan of Taylor Swift she is actually a musician -- not a top drawer one for sure but she does know how to play. She also writes much of her own lyrics, though I can not for the life of me understand how that translates into gold and platinum. She's know more as a singer, of course and its in this regard that she is most deficient -- her voice is terrible, thin and weak. What's relevant about her in this discussion is that as much money as she brings in no one knows who her backing musicians are.Interestingly, many of the top composers of the classical era went largely unnoticed while they were alive and when fame and fortune came they were already dead. The music business has always been unfair.Brian

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 11:55:48 am
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on March 17, 2018, 06:48:48 amYou would need to fo back to the 19th century to see anything fundamentally different. As soon as electronics became involved, the bulk of the talented started to be relegated to working behind the scenes. By the 60s MoTown was the biggest thing, based on the audience only seeing the singers. Most people had no idea who the writers, arrangers, musicians or producers were. A small number of people, like Quincy Jones, became famous for their work behind the scenes, but they were rare. Then we started to find many of the singer only bands were not the actual people who performed on the recording. At least auto-tune means we hear the actual named performers, however heavily processed.All the typical audience really cares about is the final show they are presented with. That's not the case with a hardened classical, jazz or rock audience, but they aren't the bulk of the market. Its still hard to achieve a long successful career without genuine talent, whatever kind of music you are involved in, so maybe it all works out fairly in the end.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 12:32:30 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on March 17, 2018, 11:55:48 amThen they might be cats just as well.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 01:50:39 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on March 17, 2018, 12:32:30 pmOr conversely:

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 02:32:41 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on March 17, 2018, 11:55:48 amI see lots of this. Many people comment on how good old Motown tracks were, whilst deriding contemporary R&B as being overly processed and soulless, yet the traditional jazz, swing and blues musicians at the time, felt the that way about about Motown: too poppy, very polished and soulless!Quote from: Electro Detective on March 17, 2018, 04:19:35 amEither you've only heard a small subsection of hip-hop music, or you're very narrow minded. Not all hip-hop is about gangs, drugs, violence and abusive sexual behaviour. Lots of it is about life in general, love and relationships, much like any other type of music. I can think of plenty of hip-hop tracks, which are profanity free and would happily let my 5 year old nephew listen to.Don't get me started on punk. Most of it is rubbish. They can't play the guitar properly, only three chords, they shout, rather than sing and there's plenty of nastiness and profanity too. At least rapping requires some level of talent!

author: alexanderbrevig
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 04:42:29 pm
content: Auto-tune is the name of the first commercial program for pitch correction. It is now understood in the profession to be an effect made known by Cher and kids probably know it because of T-pain.Pitch correction is the catch all for other uses of pitch manipulation and formant shifts.Be it slightly pulling a tone up a few cents, adding or removing vibrato or even making a nasal voice sound softer.Stop calling polishing auto-tune. Pitch correction is used everywhere by everyone. That's just how the industry and our audience works.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 10:29:41 pm
content: Sorry mate, there were pitch shifters, harmonisers, vocorders, delay lines etc etc in use 20 years that could do that before Cher did the 'oink oink' thing as an effectthat singtards everywhere today now use to CHEAT their way to fame, fortune...and insulting our ears and intelligenceAnd I know that Cher can hold a tuneand I got no issue with the lady tossing in a bit of color on one of the tracksShirley Bassey did some way out stuff back then too, that lady can definitely sing, and doesn't even need a microphone in a power outagemuch less some dial up cheater toy!

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 17, 2018, 10:44:02 pm
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on March 17, 2018, 10:29:41 pmNo, it's not cheating, because everyone knows they're using tone correction software.Now you may not like it. You're entitled to your opinion and no one's trying to change that, but don't go round accusing people of cheating, when they're not!I've been listening to some classic R&B from the 60s to 90s whist reading this thread: Diana Ross, The Temptations, The Commodores, Alexander O'Neal, Tina Moore, Mark Morrison: all good stuff, but I might put some rock on now.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 18, 2018, 02:16:15 am
content: Twelve year old girls listening to a lot of this stuff probably don't even know what auto-tune even is (or they think it's just to make funny effects).They go and think "Anyone like me can make music! Yay, I've got talent!"Then when they grow up and go to audition, the studio basically goes "We have another one...deploy the 'corrector'"...(Not that bluntly of course, but they find out the real truth that talent is not good enough.)Whatever happened to "vocal training"?

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 18, 2018, 02:50:47 am
content: Quote from: coppice on March 17, 2018, 11:55:48 amI don't completely disagree with you but I would argue that the tech of today gives far more opportunity to alter things than 50 years ago and that the tools of old were more to color or expand the voice and not partially synthesize it. We are reaching a point where we could replace people altogether and instead have REALLY anthropomorphic robots that look like models and sound perfect. Throw in some AI and you can do away with composers and musicians while where at it.Brian

author: ruairi
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: March 18, 2018, 04:12:13 am
content: You guys are hilarious.Let's talk about the epidemic of shortcuts, helping hands, copied code, auto cal routines, online calculators, simulation software etc that modern engineers (all of us here) are using on a daily basis. A real engineer is using a slide-rule and doing everything by hand…..right?A great engineer will use modern tools to create something useful and hopefully profitable, a bad engineer with all of these modern tools willstillbe a bad engineer.If finishing a recording is the definition of success then yes people use pitch correction to cheat, if actually moving people emotionally with your music is the definition of success then it requires talent and hard work, one way or another.

author: Electro Detective
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 18, 2018, 09:59:33 am
content: Ok, let's try it this wayThe activity of recruiting untalented, can't sing wannabees using Autotune to go beyond basic correction and enhancement, can only be classed asCHEATINGIt's alsorobbingtaking away work and exposure prospects from genuine vocalists and musiciansThe consumer is being cheated in this regard also, having to tolerate Autotard noise sprayed everywhere and missing out on the genuine articleCome on guys, this isn't using electric tools to make furniture faster and CADputers for electronics to save time and R+D grief,these are mediocre come no talent unscrupulous money grubbing scum, straight out cheating everyone!Please see it for what it is, instead of making excuses because unaware of how it works,believing this cheating crap is the only game in town because that's all you've been exposed to,which plays a big part in how these cheats get to be eventually accepted by the connedsumer

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: March 18, 2018, 10:39:50 am
content: Quote from: Electro Detective on March 18, 2018, 09:59:33 amCheating involves an element of deception, which isn't present, because everyone knows about it.QuoteLike CAD software robbed skilled draughtsman of their jobs.QuoteSo, what if the consumer prefers it? You may not like it, but if the majority do and it sells. Don't like it? Don't listen to it.QuoteI think I see your point: you see music as an artform, distinct from engineering and art should be a human skill, with soul, emotion etc. but the mass market doesn't care about that. In reality it's all about money and always has been, especially since the dawn of the record industry. Producers will simply use the tools to make their music sell as much as possible and people want the live performance to be similar to the track they heard on their phone and automatic pitch correction is the only way to do it.QuoteNo doubt there are plenty of people who are ignorant, but the information is freely available. My guess is some people don't want to know. They're happy to look up to the cult of celebrity. Hell there are plenty of famous people and social media stars who don't try sing, act or make jokes.