Members gdwill2u Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 I was having a discussion at the dinner table last night and my niece said that Britney has a lousy voice and that her entire act is processed. I told her that even if you don't like her style or sound you cannot say that a machine can make someone who is out of tune or pitchy sound good. Also tone and timber while effected by processing cannot be materialized out of nothing. I also said if that were true then ANYONE who could afford a studio and hire a good producer could create reasonably good cds. Who was right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Andersonology Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Um...your niece. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members '63-Strat Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 I was having a discussion at the dinner table last night and my niece said that Britney has a lousy voice and that her entire act is processed. I told her that even if you don't like her style or sound you cannot say that a machine can make someone who is out of tune or pitchy sound good. Also tone and timber while effected by processing cannot be materialized out of nothing. I also said if that were true then ANYONE who could afford a studio and hire a good producer could create reasonably good cds. Who was right? You were. While she is annoying as hell, she actually can sing her own style just fine. Her stuff is written for her so that little girls can sing along easily enough, however to think that just anyone could sound like her doing it is bs. Talk to any voice coach. The girl has been singing professionally since she was a child folks. Disney doesn't hire kids that can't sing, hate to break it to you. Is it really any coincidence that you got Aguilera, Timberlake and Spears from the same show? There will be all sorts of posts to the contrary, but that's based on how saturated her bs is in the public eye IMO. Carry on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blargh Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Sorry, but she is probably right. From what I've heard of britney spears's songs, she doesn't really a singing voice...you can correct pitch, and you can add all sorts of filters and multitracks to try to mask the bad singing, and do takes and takes to get it just right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EdgeOfDarkness Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 ask Cher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DoubleBarrel Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 I also said if that were true then ANYONE who could afford a studio and hire a good producer could create reasonably good cds.Who was right? Yep, anyone who can afford a studio and a good producer can create reasonably good sounding cd's. Songwriting is another matter. I think shes 75 % correct and you are 25 % correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members HKSblade1 Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 she can sing some, Years ago singers had to be able to sing not just look good in skimp outfits.Today take someone from MM Club or Nick and make them superstars with pitch correction and sampling crap. Give them a headset mic, hot outfit and dancing lessons. Just pipe in the cd's cuz the vocals are an illusion. Thanks Madonna. Yes she could sing but the whole fab dance club Vegas act is annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ranalli Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 she actually can sing her own style just fine. Exactly....even though she's not a great singer by professional standards I think her voice is kind of sexy and works for the songs she records. I actually don't like the Aguilera/Shakira frog in the throat type tone. However, what I'd really like to see is female singer break out like Pat Benetar again.....she could really wail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Scott K Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 You can definitely auto-tune vocals. Tons of bands do it. I'm not going to comment on Britney Spears' vocal ability, as I couldn't make a fair judgement, but what you told your neice is incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members '63-Strat Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 You can autotune vocals, but none of that BS is going to compare with someone who does it right in the first place. Resonance and projection and pitch are all part of the same process, and non-singers aren't going to really get that IMO. Britney sings modern pop, which requires that you be able to *speak* every note, it has a lot more in common with theatre than what some of you guys think of as "singing." Pitch is only one part of the equation, no one cares if someone that has a weak voice can sing in tune because it still sounds like crap. Do you guys *actually* think you can take anyone off the street and make a comparable voice track to someone who is a trained singer with "studio magic"? lmao. You can come a lot closer than you used to, but its never going to really work, IMO. Paris Hilton, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gdwill2u Posted November 2, 2007 Author Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Are you guys being serious, I know that producers do a lot to improve and augment a voice but I know you can take all the effects in the world and if your guitar is out of tune or you can play a true note then it will show. Unless you are doing something so "Out there" that it is just all effect. I am not claiming to know, but still a skeptic She was on the Disney channel and sang without aids, and that is how she was "discovered". Before that she auditioned for Disney (the MM show) and won the spot over tons of other girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kittie Rose Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Yeah, someone's watched that episode of the Simpsons and taken it too much to heart. Still, knowing more about sound than most at the time I still was amazed to find out quite how much processing DOES go on. I think that you're both wrong in this case, and the answer is somewhere in between(though I hate when people always presume an answer MUST be in between just because two people are arguing, this is one of those rare cases). I don't think Britney is "good". She may "technically" be able to sing in tune much better than I am able to by a long shot but it doesn't mean that the end effect is really all that interesting to listen to. However, at least she has some tonal quality to her voice, unlike "Christina". Her voice is completely blank, and covers it up with various techniques, vibrato and 100 different kinds of "Ooooohaaaaaahs". If you listen she's constantly doing funny little things with her voice to hide the fact that she has no real tone. With singing, tone is at least as important as technique. With guitar it can do either way - textural guitarists vs. prog guitarists have different outlooks. But I'd much rather listen to someone like Nik Fiend who can barely sing in key but at least really gets behind his performances and has an interesting voice, unlike Britney Spears, who may not be processed excessively digitally, but is still very much processed in other ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gdwill2u Posted November 2, 2007 Author Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 ask Cher. That's a good example, I remember her when she was young and for my buck her voice was MUCH better than the processed crap she hasa been doing for the last 20 years. She had a powerful and pure voice that was definitely soulful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blargh Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Are you guys being serious, I know that producers do a lot to improve and augment a voice but I know you can take all the effects in the world and if your guitar is out of tune or you can play a true note then it will show. Unless you are doing something so "Out there" that it is just all effect. I am not claiming to know, but still a skepticShe was on the Disney channel and sang without aids, and that is how she was "discovered". Before that she auditioned for Disney (the MM show) and won the spot over tons of other girls. A guitar is polyphonic, it'd be a hell of a trick to pitch correct it. But sure, you could throw autotune on a guitar track and fix an out of tune bend, or punch in a bum note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kinggeoff Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 she knows enough to be able to carry a tune decently... but there's HEAVY compression and probably autotune by the pound on her studio stuff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members JBecker Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 The long and short of it is that while she can sing, many of her tracks are so over processed she's basically not singing. Yes, you can take someone who is absolutely atrocious and make it osund decent if it doesn't require too much from the performance. Things like vibrato, strength, etc can't be faked, but singing a verse line and a chorus that's just a few notes can be faked. She probably can/could sing pretty damn well at some point, but she hasn't had to in some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kittie Rose Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 See, most people won't notice minor pitch corrections. You're thinking of using something like Goldwave to touch it up without even knowing fully how to do it. With some expensive gear and enough time and the right expertise, it can be done much more easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members telephant Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 You were. While she is annoying as hell, she actually can sing her own style just fine. Her stuff is written for her so that little girls can sing along easily enough, however to think that just anyone could sound like her doing it is bs. Talk to any voice coach. The girl has been singing professionally since she was a child folks. Disney doesn't hire kids that can't sing, hate to break it to you. Is it really any coincidence that you got Aguilera, Timberlake and Spears from the same show? There will be all sorts of posts to the contrary, but that's based on how saturated her bs is in the public eye IMO. Carry on Im going to diagree with you and say she is a half ass vocalist. You have more skill than that twat. Aguilera on the other hand has a PHENOMENAL voice. Im not saying she's horrible, but she definitely isnt better than average. She blew up because her parents pulled a Tiger Woods on her and had her training since she was a little girl. And a lot of Britney's vocal are autotuned and processed to all hell. Of course, Id still hit it. I also said if that were true then ANYONE who could afford a studio and hire a good producer could create reasonably good cds. Depends on what you consider "reasonably good." But yes, if you have the money, time, and engineering skills, you can easily put out something on par with a Spears album. IMO anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kittie Rose Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Also, some voices are more "editable" than others. Spears has a bit of rawr in her voice so it's easier to edit that into something that sounds passable. Someone with a more flat out voice, you can't do that with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blargh Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Paris Hilton, anyone? They sound almost exactly the same, to be honest. Then again, I haven't dug deep into the Britney Spears discography, I don't know if she really belts it out in some song Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members '63-Strat Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Im going to diagree with you and say she is a half ass vocalist. You have more skill than that twat. Aguilera on the other hand has a PHENOMENAL voice. Im not saying she's horrible, but she definitely isnt better than average. She blew up because her parents pulled a Tiger Woods on her and had her training since she was a little girl. And a lot of Britney's vocal are autotuned and processed to all hell. Of course, Id still hit it. Depends on what you consider "reasonably good." But yes, if you have the money, time, and engineering skills, you can easily put out something on par with a Spears album. IMO anyways. Newsflash! pretty much every major pop release is autotuned and processed to hell because people are used to hearing that glossy perfect production and its what sells. I'm not disputing that her records are like that, but you really can't get away from garbage in garbage out IMO. You can polish a turd, but her voice is extremely "pop" and there's a reason it sells, IMO. Yes she's extremely mainstream and I understand the need to say she sucks (and she does!!!) but if you took her before her recent bs and made her stand in a studio and sing I'm saying she could, that's it. I'm sure I'll be flamed for years for this, lol. Her stuff is seriously written to be easy to sing along to, because that sells big time to young girls. She's not a serious singer, of course, but I don't think she was ever trying to be. And let's not get my singing involved in this you cheeky sumbitch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members '63-Strat Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 They sound almost exactly the same, to be honest. Then again, I haven't dug deep into the Britney Spears discography, I don't know if she really belts it out in some song Disagree. And I'm not talking about belting it. I'm saying even if you take a line that's in both of their regular speaking range, there are big differences in how they sing, but I'm obviously in the minority here I'm gonna return to practicing some metal now, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members telephant Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Newsflash! pretty much every major pop release is autotuned and processed to hell because people are used to hearing that glossy perfect production and its what sells. I'm not disputing that her records are like that, but you really can't get away from garbage in garbage out IMO. You can polish a turd, but her voice is extremely "pop" and there's a reason it sells, IMO. Yes she's extremely mainstream and I understand the need to say she sucks (and she does!!!) but if you took her before her recent bs and made her stand in a studio and sing I'm saying she could, that's it. I'm sure I'll be flamed for years for this, lol. Her stuff is seriously written to be easy to sing along to, because that sells big time to young girls. She's not a serious singer, of course, but I don't think she was ever trying to be. And let's not get my singing involved in this you cheeky sumbitch Well I agree with you here. And her music is definitely written around pop sensibilities. But what about her natural talent for singing? She's been trained for years and this is the best she can do? Have you ever heard her sing acapella? Its not pretty. From a vocalist stand point, Id call her skills average while someone like Aguliera is excellent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members evhtone Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Im going to diagree with you and say she is a half ass vocalist. You have more skill than that twat. Aguilera on the other hand has a PHENOMENAL voice. Im not saying she's horrible, but she definitely isnt better than average. She blew up because her parents pulled a Tiger Woods on her and had her training since she was a little girl. And a lot of Britney's vocal are autotuned and processed to all hell. Of course, Id still hit it. Depends on what you consider "reasonably good." But yes, if you have the money, time, and engineering skills, you can easily put out something on par with a Spears album. IMO anyways. Right answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members '63-Strat Posted November 2, 2007 Members Share Posted November 2, 2007 Well I agree with you here. And her music is definitely written around pop sensibilities. But what about her natural talent for singing? She's been trained for years and this is the best she can do? Have you ever heard her sing acapella? Its not pretty. From a vocalist stand point, Id call her skills average while someone like Aguliera is excellent. I agree with what you're saying. But as far as non-singer/laypeople go I hear them parroting things like "oh anyone can sound like that, its all studio magic" etc. and that's just not true. You're not going to get someone doing a better Britney than Britney IMO. In that sense I think the OP is right and his niece is wrong. And I think Aguilera oversings pretty much everything, so while she can sing really well, I can't listen to her for any longer than Britney really Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.