Members UstadKhanAli Posted April 17, 2006 Members Share Posted April 17, 2006 Well, that's right - you DON'T need a career in music to sing. But the other thing we are talking about is how to have that "soul" come through without sucking it dry with copious or inappropriate use of a tool. It's all about balance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BIGD Posted April 17, 2006 Members Share Posted April 17, 2006 Originally posted by UstadKhanAli Well, that's right - you DON'T need a career in music to sing.But the other thing we are talking about is how to have that "soul" come through without sucking it dry with copious or inappropriate use of a tool. It's all about balance. Somebody should tell Shania Twain and Mutt Lange that!! All that I hear is autotune on her recordings...the 5 seconds before I lunge for the radio to change the station. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted April 17, 2006 Members Share Posted April 17, 2006 Originally posted by BIGD Somebody should tell Shania Twain and Mutt Lange that!! All that I hear is autotune on her recordings...the 5 seconds before I lunge for the radio to change the station. I know, huh? Too much of any effect can be a bad thing. Just to elaborate on Paulskirocks comment, my guess is that a lot of the discussion about singing as a career is a reaction to Where's initial comment. Obviously, lots of people are not doing it as a career. And whether that singer is considering a career or not, there should be consideration given as to how much and how (or whether) the effects are applied to support the spirit and emotion of the performance and song in the best way possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members paulskirocks Posted April 17, 2006 Members Share Posted April 17, 2006 there you go again, ken... always being pragmatic! paulski plus, i thought the thread was about which outboard unit to use, not whether or not to do so... and i still haven't heard an answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted April 17, 2006 Members Share Posted April 17, 2006 That's what happens every single time someone brings up pitch correction. It's one of those topics that incites polarized opinions. At any rate... AutoTune (Antares AVP-1), TC Electronic Intonator and TC Helicon all make hardware pitch correction devices. I do not know whether the Antares AVP-1 offers Graphic Mode or something similar that would allow you to fix one note the way I wanted to do it. If it didn't, that would be a deal-breaker for me personally if using it in a recording studio. There is also the Antares ATR-1a. No, I do not know what the difference is. I do not know which one of these is better, or if any of them have the ability to go in with Graphic Mode or something similar. To the best of my knowledge, Melodyne does not offer hardware (outboard) pitch correction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Paully Posted April 18, 2006 Members Share Posted April 18, 2006 Here's a thought... the best of both worlds. How about hardware pitch correction boxes that can be computer driven using CC controllers. I have a couple of units that do a really good job at correction within a full tone; a Lexicon G2 and a TC-Helicon Voice-One. The Lexi is my favorite. It's really a multi-effect unit, but the pitch correction is pretty artifact free, and coloration is almost unnoticable; even when soloed. CC message levels 0-127 can control really small or really large amounts of shift correction, depending on how the effect is programmed. The best part is there's a built-in bypass relay (also CC capable), so the effect can be truelly switched out of the circuit if not in use. Makes for much cleaner tracks. Now, on with the 'other' discussion. Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anna Log Posted April 18, 2006 Author Members Share Posted April 18, 2006 Originally posted by paulskirocks there you go again, ken... always being pragmatic! paulski plus, i thought the thread was about which outboard unit to use, not whether or not to do so... and i still haven't heard an answer! Amen on that last line brother!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted April 18, 2006 Members Share Posted April 18, 2006 The conversation about appropriate usage of pitch correction is important, if a bit tired. But to get back to the original question (this will be my third direct attempt to steer the conversation back, btw), why do you require a hardware pitch correction device? If you state that, people might get a better handle on suggestions. For instance, do you need something for live purposes? Recording? Do you want to run whole vocals through it? Or just fix a few notes? Maybe if you give a few more details, people might be able to help you more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anna Log Posted April 18, 2006 Author Members Share Posted April 18, 2006 I'm sorry man...I certainly do not mean to offend. I do not understand how it works. I thought that it only kicked in when it was needed. That seems to be the ideal method, if you need it at all. It would serve a purpose in the studio for me and my band and who ever else records here...only if it can do it's thing without being heard. I'm from the school of thought where I'm gonna try to sing it right first. Anyhoo...I decided to buy a mic instead. I hope this thread didn't create any hate and discontent among members. I freakin love youse guys...even the ones I disagree with. :wave: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DeathMonkey Posted April 18, 2006 Members Share Posted April 18, 2006 In todays recording environment, records are as artificially perfect as people can make them. Digital editing, comping, all of it renders the idea of the perfect one take performance a joke. Whether you comp a vocal track or tune it, the idea that one is somehow "more morally correct" is illusionary at best. Depending on the vocalist, I make the decision to either comp, tune, or leave it alone. If the vocalist has a great take, full of emotion and feel, but a few notes are a bit off pitch, why is it wrong to fix them rather than spend the next untold hours (and the $$$) to get another magical performance with the same feel but with no pitchy notes? Feel>technique all damn day, and I see nothing wrong with bringing the take up to todays "everything must be perfect" standards, because that's what listeners are trained to expect. I greatly prefer that a vocal take be one continous take all through the song, to preserve a continuity of emotion and feel, the natural progression through the song of feel, to keep the artists evolution as naturally as possible. I feel I can get this far easier and end up with a better, more emotionally cohesive track by correcting a few notes than by comping or editing. The feel and the song sell the record, and as long as the artist can pull it off live to the extent that the audience is satisfied with the performance, this "sing perfectly or flip burgers" argument is silly. The current standard of "perfection" is artificial and the attitude of "sing perfectly or die trying" doesn't take into account artists who are thunderously effective communicators of ideas and emotions but might not have the greatest technique. Glad you guys weren't the ones to record Bob Dylan, Neil Young, Jimi Hendrix or Black Sabbath. Most of us do not have the luxury of dealing with true professionals day in and day out, and at the end of the day, the person who signs the checks must be happy. Whatever I can do to make my clients' project be successful, I am more than happy to do, although most of my clients are more songwriters than singers, so tuning a vocal isn't going to make them a star vocalist, but it might make their demo of their song more saleable. That said... One way hardware can be used effectively, as I understand from a friend who uses the Antares box, is to split the signal and record the signal through the box on one track, the natural take on the other, and crossfade or replace the pitchy notes from the corrected track. He likes the Antares unit. He also has the Digitech (I think) vocal performer floor unit, and doesn't much like it. I really think software is the way to go, and I will agree that tuning vocals live is far more a moral dilemma than using it in the studio. It is accepted that studio recordings are all somewhat artificial, and represent the BEST a band or artist can do. Live, however, it is understood that you are getting the real talent, warts and all. To pitch correct live really is more like cheating. Like any other tool, it isn't inherently good or evil. The intent with which it is used determines that. Are you helping your client to be competitive or trying to fool an audience? Murky waters indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted April 18, 2006 Members Share Posted April 18, 2006 Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted April 18, 2006 Members Share Posted April 18, 2006 Originally posted by Anna Log I'm sorry man...I certainly do not mean to offend. I do not understand how it works. No worries....just askin' for more detail. No offense taken! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Da Boss Posted April 23, 2006 Members Share Posted April 23, 2006 Is Antares better than TC Helicon? TC Helicon is the best sounding and has a more detailed interface and software to go with it Antares works well if you are on a budget but can be made to sound great with a few adjustments of the presets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.