Auto-Tune Abuse

~~The Unfan~~ · 09-24-2009, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lateralus

Yes, they are, but in very different ways. I just don't think using Auto-tune is the same as using a guitar pedal according to the reasons why people use Auto-tune (purely for pitch-correction and 'covering up' tonal flaws) verses the reasons why most musicians use guitar pedals (not to correct pitch but to manipulate sound in other ways). Yes, they are both a means to enhance and manipulate sound but they are definitely not the same thing.

As long as its acceptable to modify sound I don't see why we should draw the line at modifying it a specific way.

Quote:

I've come across a lot of people that call many other vocal processors 'autotune' when they aren't pitch correctors and they don't do the same thing as the original Auto-tune. Not all vocal processors do the same thing.

Thats different, and not quite what I'm on about. However, music that is fully digital, while still needing a composer, is performed by mechanical processes which don't make mistakes. Nobody would ever say that electronica isn't real music, so I don't see why using something to make your voice flawless is any different as far as the performance aspect.

Astronomer · 09-24-2009, 02:03 AM

^ You're right, that's very true I guess. I hadn't really looked at it in that way. Although there is a huge difference between well-produced electronic music and a crummy pop song made lazily by running vocals through an autotune processor... just as there is lazily made music in other genres as well I suppose.

And also... unfortunately there are actually many people out there who would argue that electronica isn't real music!

Certif1ed · 09-24-2009, 02:06 AM

Wasn't it Kylie who first got into trouble with early versions of autotuning technology?

Anyway - she soon learned how to sing!

I agree that dependecy on the technology is very bad for popular music, but it takes a LOT more than being able to sing in tune to be a good singer, and music depends on a gazillion things in addition to being in tune.

Before the technology existed, people sang and played "out of tune" (that is, instruments and voices did not pitch to precisely 440hz or whatever) - musicians FELT the music.

ALL singers sing flat. Fact.

I have "perfect pitch", decades worth of vocal training including large-scale choral, opera and solo work and I sing flat*.

*Flat here meaning in terms of pitch (which is all that autotune can fix), not flat in terms of tone, style, or musicianship, which autotune will never fix.

Ace · 09-24-2009, 02:38 AM

A guitar pedal, like a synthesizer, is used to add effects.
Auto-tune is used to fix mistakes.

Don't defend the obvious.
I'm not saying it should never be used, I'm saying it shouldn't be used to deceive people.

Fruitonica · 09-24-2009, 02:52 AM

Quote:

If a singer can't replicate the performance without the aid of auto-tune, then its nothing but garbage.

Why so fixated on the technical skill that goes into a song? If a singer can't really sing and uses autotune, why would I care as long as it sounds good? Whether it does or not is another argument, they run the risk of sounding 'plastic'. But in the end it's artistic discretion.

Ace · 09-24-2009, 02:58 AM

Anyone and their brother could be the lead singer of a band, if they could alter their vocals and make them sound perfect. What's the point of putting your all into a performance, if you can just tweak it later?

It isn't that hard of a concept to grasp.

djchameleon · 09-24-2009, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace

A guitar pedal, like a synthesizer, is used to add effects.
Auto-tune is used to fix mistakes.

Sure, it can be used to fix mistakes but half the time artists use it for the effect not to fix mistakes

Ace · 09-24-2009, 04:29 AM

In genres like techno, that's acceptable.

In genres like Rock, I sincerely doubt you're going to hear many "Daft Punks", if you catch my drift.

T-Pain sucks, for the record.

djchameleon · 09-24-2009, 04:32 AM

you're right and

lol I wasn't defending T-pain's style or use of it

Ace · 09-24-2009, 04:38 AM

Haha. I know.

Just thought I would throw that out there, since he was one of the first to come to mind.

09-24-2009, 02:03 AM	#32 (permalink)
Astronomer we are stardust Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Australia Posts: 2,894	^ You're right, that's very true I guess. I hadn't really looked at it in that way. Although there is a huge difference between well-produced electronic music and a crummy pop song made lazily by running vocals through an autotune processor... just as there is lazily made music in other genres as well I suppose. And also... unfortunately there are actually many people out there who would argue that electronica isn't real music! __________________

09-24-2009, 02:06 AM	#33 (permalink)
Certif1ed Music Addict Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 194	Wasn't it Kylie who first got into trouble with early versions of autotuning technology? Anyway - she soon learned how to sing! I agree that dependecy on the technology is very bad for popular music, but it takes a LOT more than being able to sing in tune to be a good singer, and music depends on a gazillion things in addition to being in tune. Before the technology existed, people sang and played "out of tune" (that is, instruments and voices did not pitch to precisely 440hz or whatever) - musicians FELT the music. ALL singers sing flat. Fact. I have "perfect pitch", decades worth of vocal training including large-scale choral, opera and solo work and I sing flat. Flat here meaning in terms of pitch (which is all that autotune can fix), not flat in terms of tone, style, or musicianship, which autotune will never fix.

09-24-2009, 04:32 AM	#39 (permalink)
djchameleon A.B.N. Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: NY baby Posts: 11,451	you're right and lol I wasn't defending T-pain's style or use of it