Members soundwave106 Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 hmm. See, now I'm wondering how this weird little effect could be used live... it's not in standard multi-effect units, is it? It could be fun to have the wet/dry mapped to a pedal, and then just use it for accents / breaks / etc. Antares (the first autotune manufacturer) makes a rackmount hardware box, too. There are other software applications out there now like Melodyne that do pitch correction as well; I think some other vocal effects boxes have pitch correction these days, too. Autotune is great way to keep mediocre singers in line, which is idea for pop music that relies more on looks than anything else. The sad thing is its used to correct genuinely good singers simply to save some studio time, too. Autotune tends to take some of the nuances out of a person's vocal style. If a singer is genuinely decent, it should IMHO be used only sparingly. Unfortunately in today's pop music, that isn't the case. I've seen a few artists go off on autotune (like Neko Case of New Pornographers fame, etc.), with justification. The thing is, given what pop music has devolved to these days, autotune applications are a perfect fit. Not that I like it much. Oh, well. The T-Pain deal (using autotune as a "robotic" effect) doesn't bother me as much; no different to me than Zapp and Roger using talkboxes in most of their songs etc. You may not like the effect, but it's an artistic statement of sorts, not a shortcut. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wingfijm Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 could not have said it better myself. Antares is the "808 cowbell" of the new millenium of pop-r&b. HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Superace25 Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 The T-Pain deal (using autotune as a "robotic" effect) doesn't bother me as much; no different to me than Zapp and Roger using talkboxes in most of their songs etc. You may not like the effect, but it's an artistic statement of sorts, not a shortcut. Well said. It's kinda like the TB-303: it was supposed to be a "natural" replacement bass, and it totally sucked at that. But then they screwed with it and accidentally created acid music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Noise... Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 I agree completely with this topic - auto-tune on vocals just suck. I rarely listen to anything "mainstream" because of it. I'd take an average singer over some digitized crap any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members memedesigner Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 the worst. Wow. That song's subtle on so many levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pogo97 Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 Hey, somebody's finally singing about my life. Just like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members AnCap Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 yep. i try to explain this to some of my clients. i think there's a pitch-correction backlash in the works. buyers are going to start thinking,"why am i paying good money to listen to a singer who cannot sing?" This correction is when I swoop in and buy on of the rack units. I want one as a toy to go along with my vocoder and talkbox. Can you use a midi keyboard with autotune as though it were a vocoder/synth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members The Audacity Works Posted November 16, 2007 Members Share Posted November 16, 2007 I agree completely with this topic - auto-tune on vocals just suck. I rarely listen to anything "mainstream" because of it. I'd take an average singer over some digitized crap any day.If you can hear it, chances are it was used as an effect (or commonly, some other piece of gear, like a vocoder or talk box). If Autotune is done correctly (hand-drawn on problem notes only), it's completely transparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 yep. i try to explain this to some of my clients. i think there's a pitch-correction backlash in the works. buyers are going to start thinking,"why am i paying good money to listen to a singer who cannot sing?" I hope so, but it seems a lot of folks can't hear the processing unless it's cranked to high levels. I hear it all over Green Day too "Wake me up when December Ends" is horrible as a result; the real noticeable blip is on the "a" in wake Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wades_keys Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 Yeah I know... talkbox takes excessive skill and autotune is excessive non skill.However, the autotune function for T.Pain and others use it mainly for vocoding effect. I don't really mind it that much cuz it actually sounds pretty cool...But for people that use autotune to try to "hide" their imperfections and make it subtle yet obvious... that's when I hate it. The problem is - you can't have one without the other. Or stated a different way: the producers get the "cool" sound and fix the crappy vocals at the same time. Perfect example IMO: Kid Rock. I'd love to hear him sing one of his slow ballads without AutoTune - I don't think he can pull it off. :poke: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cloacal-X Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 I don't have any problem with autotune used as an effect or for corrective purposes. To me the recording studio is a place for uninhibited creativity, the stage is for the exhibition of natural talent. I think stuff like T-Pain is just not compelling music, and the autotune effect is the target of much of its derision because of its association with trite, uninventive commercialized music. It has nothing to do with the merits of the tool itself, which works really well as a creative as well as a corrective device. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Diametro Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BonsoWonderDog Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 What's the difference between Autotune, talkbox and vocoder exactly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TempusRob Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 A vocoder takes the formants and characteristics of a signal (usually a voice) and applies it to another signal (usually a synth). Hence the "talking synth" sound. A talkbox actually amplifies an audio signal into your mouth, where your mouth/tongue "filter" it much like it filters your voice. So again, you get a "talking synth" sound, but it's usually a bit more "vocal" in its characteristics. Autotune, in its simplest form, takes a monophonic input signal (usually a voice) and locks it to the nearest frequency on the scale. So if someone sings an A, but hits 443Hz instead of 440Hz, it'll adjust it to 440Hz. The effect can be Vocoder-esque when you drown the vocal in autotune, as seen in the T-Pain video, since it eliminates the more natural slides in a vocal line. But if you compare the two there's a clear distinction. Done right, however, it's not necessarily noticeable. But in a lot of pop albums released these days you can hear a sort of buzz from the autotune on sustained notes. References: Vocoder: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VocoderTalkbox: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TalkboxAutotune: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autotune & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pitch_correction Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Noise... Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 If you can hear it, chances are it was used as an effect (or commonly, some other piece of gear, like a vocoder or talk box). If Autotune is done correctly (hand-drawn on problem notes only), it's completely transparent. I notice it a lot in mainstream stuff - even when it wouldn't be used as an effect. To me, when it's used is seems to digitize the voice. Maybe I'm just overly sensitive to it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BonsoWonderDog Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 TempusRob - thanks for the clear answer. So..."Praise You" by Fat Boy Slim......that would be a vocoder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pogo97 Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 I notice it a lot in mainstream stuff - even when it wouldn't be used as an effect. To me, when it's used is seems to digitize the voice. Maybe I'm just overly sensitive to it? I keep hearing it, too; mostly when I'm listening to my wife's preferred station (all chick rock, all the time; they actually promise not to play anything that would be embarrassing at the office). It makes me kind of sad because sometimes the songs are fine but the production is completely wallpaper and the singers sound like space aliens. Maybe some people just hear it more clearly than others. Like asparagus pee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Birdienumnum Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 audacity works is correct - you really can't hear it when done right (hand drawn on problem notes only). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Noise... Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 I keep hearing it, too; mostly when I'm listening to my wife's preferred station (all chick rock, all the time; they actually promise not to play anything that would be embarrassing at the office). It makes me kind of sad because sometimes the songs are fine but the production is completely wallpaper and the singers sound like space aliens. Maybe some people just hear it more clearly than others. Like asparagus pee. Yep. Like I said, a lot of mainstream stuff seems to have auto-tuned parts thanks to crappy singers. And, it's noticeable thanks to poor use of it. I think that some people's ears are just a lot more sensitive to some tones than others. For me, it's blatant when a song is auto-tuned. And, unless it's intentionally used, and used well for that, I can't listen to the song because it bothers me so much. As I said above - I'd much rather listen to a REAL singer - even if they aren't spectacular. Some of my favorite singers aren't great at all. But, they don't fake it at all either. And, as for the radio, I can't bear to listen to it anymore. So much horrible, repetitive, and rehashed garbage....it's sickening. Not only that, but the constant commercials start to get pretty annoying as well. I just use my mp3 player in the car. Shuffle all works out pretty well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members ElectricPuppy Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 TempusRob - thanks for the clear answer.So..."Praise You" by Fat Boy Slim......that would be a vocoder? I'm not certain, but that sounds to me more like sampler looping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Birdienumnum Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 For me, it's blatant when a song is auto-tuned. Nope. There will be some songs, generally the ones with good singers to begin with and good engineers working with them, that go right past your ears, with subtle and discreet use of autotune. You should say, when a song is blatantly autotuned, you hear it. Sorry, that is the truthy truth. In the old days, even the finest artists would blow a note or two, leave the studio to go on vacation, and then the poor producers and engineers would spend days speeding up/slowing down reels very slightly, and syncing and comping them. Autotune simply eliminates that, if done right. I wish I had it on one album I recorded, back in 1989. My solution? It was only the opening note that was off, so . . . we faded it in. If that happened today, it would be autotuned and you would never know it, I guarantee it. And yes, I have very, very good ears. It's my best feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members pogo97 Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 I don't even know if what I'm hearing is autotune (though I know that when I hear it) or some other horrible effect. I mean, what is it that they do to Shania's voice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BonsoWonderDog Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 They squeeze her nuts while she's singing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Birdienumnum Posted November 17, 2007 Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 I don't even know if what I'm hearing is autotune (though I know that when I hear it) or some other horrible effect. I mean, what is it that they do to Shania's voice? There are so very many ways to process, and overprocess, a voice. If you think you hear a buzz surrounding the voice and you think it's autotune, well, it might be (autotune being abused, that is) and/or it might be a great many different things as well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Mintbeetle Posted November 17, 2007 Author Members Share Posted November 17, 2007 I don't really give a {censored} if it's supposed to be a blatant effect. It makes me want to claw my ears out. The sad thing is, I thought it was cool, or at least not offensive, when it was new. It's just been massively overused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.