Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 22, 2014 Members Share Posted October 22, 2014 I don't know either. I'm trying to hear where you hear it and where I don't. So where were the autotuned notes on Phil's track? Teach me. I want to learn to hear it better than I already do. All of that post and you somehow neglected to mention where you think the autotuned was used. Give me an example of where it is allegedly "transparent" but isn't and maybe I'll have an amen for you. Or you can be gladly be disappointed in me if I don't. Because, so far, all I'm getting out of this is you CLAIM to hear it better than everyone else here but can't show that you actually CAN. Yeah, I read Tim`s post and was waiting for him to list the locations but it never happened. I`m not surprised. Tim goes off on these "holier than thou" episodes from time to time. I consider myself to have a pretty good ear as well…. but hearing subtle auto-tune and well done punch-ins in the context of a mix is pretty tough most of the time. I`ve pointed out some blunders from time to time on GS with notable engineers and I get a bad rap around there for not kissing up… oh well. I pointed out a digital clip on a Maroon 5 record that Mike Shipley mixed, pointed it out to him on GS in a thread someone started about how excellently mixed the record was (and it was) but I was disappointed that Mike and Mutt Lange would allow the label to smash the record in mastering so badly… that led to a very long and ugly debate. I was attacked, I was called disrespectful, a troll, etc…. and my entire point was lost. Mike latter admitted that the record was smashed and that he and Lange argued with the label about the mastering… my posts pointing out the distortion/digital clipping were deleted by the moderator, so I was made to look like the devil. Mike`s rant toward labels is posted below, #56 if anyone cares… My point is, where are the edits Tim? We`re all still waiting to hear those stellar analog tracks you record too. And honestly, I`m not picking on you mate because I do think we`re both coming from a place of purity but you have to be able to build your arguments before you knock down others. Thats all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Beck Posted October 22, 2014 Members Share Posted October 22, 2014 Yeah, I read Tim`s post and was waiting for him to list the locations but it never happened. I`m not surprised. Tim goes off on these "holier than thou" episodes from time to time. That's not it at all Ernest. I do think my perceptions have consistently put me in the vanguard. I can't help that. It's just the way it has gone. It's more that my peers on these forums tend to be behind the times. It's petty unreasonable to ask me to dumb myself down just so I get along with "Average." Like I said Autotune is passe. It's an opinion. I'm not going to play games like, "Where's Waldo" "Find the Pitch Correction." LOL No one here is going to set the terms for me because I'm not a follower... never have been... part of the reason I don't follow a lot of trends in music recording. I'm my own person. Y'all go that way and I'll go my way. You can call that holier than though if it makes you feel better. I've said what I think, and you'll all forget that I said it first like you've forgotten every other time. When people start trending away from pitch correction in large numbers then so will most of you, but not until then. I'm already there. I don't have to prove anything or play any games. All I have to do is wait... and you'll all catch up. The instances where pitch correction is intended to be transparent but is not are too numerous. It's everywhere in every genre! To me this is like trying to tell you there are people living in Los Angeles or something crazy like that and you're telling me no one lives in Los Angeles! That's how obvious pitch correction is to me in popular music. It's right there everywhere! And to be sure I'm not trying to be holier than though. I love you guys... I just think I'm right and I'm in the difficult position of expressing an honest opinion that goes against the norm on this forum. My only other option would be to lie and tell you I can't hear it. Those are my choices... to tell you what I hear or to lie to you and say I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Beck Posted October 22, 2014 Members Share Posted October 22, 2014 An article some might find interesting. By the way I don't really care for or listen to country music, but I accidentally hear it when I'm on the road and began noticing the pitch correction more and more over the last couple years. If there's a genre that shouldn't be using pitch correction (besides opera) country is it. I know these country folks must be drunk off their asses if they can stand to listen to the contemporary stuff with Autotune. That was another thread recently... we were talking about drug use pros and cons in making music. A few agreed that being drunk, stoned, whatever made the music seem to sound better until they listened back when they were sober. Sometimes I really wonder if nearly all the world is drunk and/or stoned except me. That would explain a lot. From what I can gather from what I've heard in country music there's a lot of booze and pickup trucks. Maybe the alcohol and the rumble of the pickup trucks help mask the artifacts of pitch correction... I dunno. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 22, 2014 Members Share Posted October 22, 2014 ~~ I'm not going to play games like, "Where's Waldo" "Find the Pitch Correction." LOL .... The instances where pitch correction is intended to be transparent but is not are too numerous. It's everywhere in every genre! To me this is like trying to tell you there are people living in Los Angeles or something crazy like that and you're telling me no one lives in Los Angeles! That's how obvious pitch correction is to me in popular music. It's right there everywhere! "I could point it out if I wanted to. But I'm not going to do that." Seriously?? I hear Autotune when I hear it. I don't when I don't. Does it exist where I can't hear it? I don't know for sure because I can't hear it. But at least I can admit that. I don't hear too many instances where I believe it was intended to be transparent but is not. What I DO hear a lot is where just a "bit too much" is applied in order to create a certain effect. But that's not intended to be transparent. It's intended to be heard, even if only subtly. So I asked you to provide examples of what you say you hear because I'm curious as to whether we're hearing the same thing and just calling it different things or if I'm actually missing something. But you can't point any out. Or are too above-it-all to bother to do so for us lowly Autotuniacs down here. You'll just insist you can hear it where others don't and leave it at that. Yes, maybe I'll catch up to you someday. Just glad to know you're not trying to be holier than thou about any of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members kurdy Posted October 22, 2014 Members Share Posted October 22, 2014 An article some might find interesting. By the way I don't really care for or listen to country music, but I accidentally hear it when I'm on the road and began noticing the pitch correction more and more over the last couple years. If there's a genre that shouldn't be using pitch correction (besides opera) country is it. I know these country folks must be drunk off their asses if they can stand to listen to the contemporary stuff with Autotune. That was another thread recently... we were talking about drug use pros and cons in making music. A few agreed that being drunk, stoned, whatever made the music seem to sound better until they listened back when they were sober. Sometimes I really wonder if nearly all the world is drunk and/or stoned except me. That would explain a lot. From what I can gather from what I've heard in country music there's a lot of booze and pickup trucks. Maybe the alcohol and the rumble of the pickup trucks help mask the artifacts of pitch correction... I dunno. Contemporary country music has noticeably been using heaps of Autotune for years now. I remember hearing a story a while back of a particular male country superstar who would actually use it on stage (not openly, but the effect was apparently noticeable enough). It's very much a part of the modern country sound. Not defending it, just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted October 22, 2014 Author Members Share Posted October 22, 2014 It's very much a part of pop music in general, with some producers saying that it'd be difficult to find songs in the Top 40 that are NOT Auto-Tuned. As for creating while drunk or stoned, I don't believe I have ever done that. I'm thankfully very very creative without those, and plenty weird sounding too, so I probably don't need to be sloppier and weirder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Beck Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 I hear Autotune when I hear it. I don't when I don't. Does it exist where I can't hear it? I don't know for sure because I can't hear it. But at least I can admit that. That's pretty much what it comes down to, thus if we start playing listening games it will lend nothing to the discussion because if you're not hearing it and I am we're in the same places... you over there and me over here, me thinking it's obvious and you thinking it's not. When I hear Autotune everywhere, but someone wants an example it's me that feels like doing the facepalm, but I try to refrain from that even though that's how I feel. To me it's like, "You can't hear the pitch correction? You must be yanking my chain!" See what I mean? It's an impasse that's there in the first place because we're not hearing the same thing when we listen to pop music. What interests me more is why some of us hear it and can identify it and some of us don't. You can search any number of music forums and see people like me talking to people like you with the same disagreement over Autotune. I get your premise... that for me or anyone else to hear pitch correction working it must be that it's being used sloppily or not intended in a particular case to be transparent. I get that, but I'm talking about the stuff out there where the engineer, producer, etc is telling the artist, "No one will know its being used." I still hear it. In fact, pitch correction, subtle or not is responsible for a lot of the grit and artifacts people hear when comparing digital to analog tape as a recording medium. Digital is worse than it could be were it not for a lot of the plugs, Autotune being the chief culprit IMO. I can find music with Autotune used more judiciously and thus it sounds less bad, but it's never transparent to my ear. And that's another point: who really tries that hard to use it that subtly that it's not detectable? Not many. The reality is it's one of the most abused and overused effects in music today. So what is silly to me is to try to find the 2% of cases where it is less obvious and try to make some point with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 That's pretty much what it comes down to, thus if we start playing listening games it will lend nothing to the discussion because if you're not hearing it and I am we're in the same places... you over there and me over here, me thinking it's obvious and you thinking it's not. When I hear Autotune everywhere, but someone wants an example it's me that feels like doing the facepalm, but I try to refrain from that even though that's how I feel. To me it's like, "You can't hear the pitch correction? You must be yanking my chain!" See what I mean? It's an impasse that's there in the first place because we're not hearing the same thing when we listen to pop music. There's no impass until you can show that you're hearing it in a place where I do not. Until then, your claims of superior hearing and sensitivity are just a lot of hot air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Beck Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 No, the impasse is about the methodology or specific experiment or survey method one would use, if any is even necessary. The most important thing people should come away with is to consider for themselves what impact their environment has had as far as acclimation. Our senses become acclimated. There's no way around that. This is a situation not unlike living in different climates where we are accustomed to different temperatures, relative humidity, etc. I think it's more along those lines. You see people in the upper Midwest walking around in T-shirts this time of year, while friends visiting from the south are wearing jackets. It stands to reason that people that have embraced certain tools like Autotune will become acclimated over time until what they think is subtle is quite obvious to others. Many people can't hear the nuance anymore because they've been in the environment for too long. That's just how the human body works. People need to understand these phenomena. You can't enter into these kind of debates without broad knowledge of many areas seemingly unrelated to music. Overexposure... over stimulation is something everyone should be aware of. It's the same with eyesight and sense of touch. We get most of what we know from the day-to-day experiential. Some of us are aware of that and some aren't. If you're not able to come up with examples of pitch correction that is supposed to be transparent but is not, well then no one else is going to be able to do it for you either. You won't be able to hear it. No different than if someone tells you it's too hot to be wearing that coat. It's not too hot for you, but it would be for them. Why don't you pick a song that sounds to you as though it has not been treated with pitch correction? I don't agree that listening tests will solve anything, but if you think they will the onus is really on you to give us an example of something with a pitch-corrected vocal that YOU think is undetectable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Beck Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 Yeah, I read Tim`s post and was waiting for him to list the locations but it never happened. I`m not surprised. Tim goes off on these "holier than thou" episodes from time to time. My point is, where are the edits Tim? We`re all still waiting to hear those stellar analog tracks you record too. And honestly, I`m not picking on you mate because I do think we`re both coming from a place of purity but you have to be able to build your arguments before you knock down others. Thats all. I don't agree. You Ernest must learn to recognize reasonable argumentation and accept the fact that people like me aren't going to jump when someone decides this or that is the way we're going to settle some debate. As I already stated the examples are too numerous to mention. It's industry wide and that's the point. As usual I don't recognize or follow any pecking order on this forum or anyone others. IMO the people that are looked up to for guidance in so many of these online forums are terribly under qualified to speak with any authority on many topics. You know I still see people asking basic recording 101 questions in forums like this and many of them are self-proclaimed experts with an obvious following, yet I've known the answers to their questions since 1978. So no, I'm not impressed or moved by a lot of the input. Your comments above are typical of poor argumentation... personal attacks... trying to discredit like some sleazy election time political ad. The only thing missing here is a black and white photo with me caught picking my nose and some ominous music in the the background. That's not debate. That's not reasonable discussion. I'm not knocking down any one, but rather a practice that has and is ruining music in our time. That's the way I see it. I don't have to bring my tracks in here when we have decades of artists, engineers and producers that did it right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 Tim, I`m not going to argue with you. We`ve been done that road before. EB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 Why don't you pick a song that sounds to you as though it has not been treated with pitch correction? I don't agree that listening tests will solve anything, but if you think they will the onus is really on you to give us an example of something with a pitch-corrected vocal that YOU think is undetectable. The clip that Phil provided. Does your superior hearing abilities detect AutoTune in that clip? I can't hear any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 No, the impasse is about the methodology or specific experiment or survey method one would use, if any is even necessary. The most important thing people should come away with is to consider for themselves what impact their environment has had as far as acclimation. Our senses become acclimated. There's no way around that. This is a situation not unlike living in different climates where we are accustomed to different temperatures, relative humidity, etc. I think it's more along those lines. You see people in the upper Midwest walking around in T-shirts this time of year, while friends visiting from the south are wearing jackets. What you see as acclimation, I really see as just fashion. We think one hair style looks fantastic on girls in one decade and then laugh at how ridiculous it was the next. The effect of Autotune is in fashion right now. To the degree it is used as such---I sometimes like it and sometimes don't. Depends on the song and my taste. But there's no objective "right" or "wrong" about its use in such instances. It's just a fashion choice like adding slapback or phase shifting. If you're not able to come up with examples of pitch correction that is supposed to be transparent but is not, well then no one else is going to be able to do it for you either. You won't be able to hear it. You're the one making the claim that such examples exist and that you are able to hear them when others do not. It's not my claim to prove, so the onus is not on me to provide such examples. But, yes, if such examples do exist, then one can learn to hear the use of Autotune better. Just as one can learn to hear slight differences in EQ. Listening to audio is, in many respects, a learned trait. Skilled audio engineers are trained to hear certain things in certain manners. A piano tuner learns to hear the slight differences in pitch. So yes, if in fact you CAN hear Autotune better than anyone else on the forum, you could teach others to hear it better as well. The starting point would be to select these subtle uses that most others don't hear that you do and show us exactly where they exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 The starting point would be to select these subtle uses that most others don't hear that you do and show us exactly where they exist. You might as well let it go. It's quite apparent that he's not interested in doing that. He'd rather tell us how amazing his ears are and how ours are so inferior to his, or complain about methodology (what methodology??? - I open a multitrack session, note where AT was used, send the list to Craig, and Tim tells us what he thinks, and Craig confirms if he's right or not) or anything else to claim superiority without actually directly demonstrating it or teaching others how to listen better. IOW, he's not interested in helping you - just in impressing you. But talk's easy and cheap Tim. I gave you a fair and reasonable chance to display your auditory prowess, and if you'd like to pass on that, that's totally your decision. Just don't expect me to buy what you're trying to sell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 For the record, I'd like to reiterate that I CAN hear AT side effects; I hear the intentional "misuse" of it as an effect all the time, as well as times where the engineer was lazy and just did everything in Auto mode, or was less than skillful with their use of the tool and it left audible artifacts. I also have heard times when an UNprocessed vocal displayed some of the same sort of sounds that are quite similar to AT artifacts... I know what to listen for, and when I hear those things when I solo out the track, I veto the use of the tool. If Tim can hear it in the final mix in spite of my best efforts, he has an opportunity to display that ability. It is obvious that he has decided to pass on that. I respect that, but I'm not going to be swayed by his claims without evidence. I trust my own ears more than I trust Tim's unsubstantiated claims. The track's there. People can listen to it, read what Tim (Beck) has said, and come to their own conclusions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted October 23, 2014 Author Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 Just for fun, when I have some free time, I would like to sit down and listen to that and see if I can hear where there is pitch correction in that track, Phil. Now, especially from you, who I would expect to implement it well, I am guessing that I will not be able to tell where it is. But I think I want to try this just for the fun of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted October 23, 2014 Share Posted October 23, 2014 Any time Ken. If you'd like, after you've made your best guesses, we could call up the source (unprocessed) take and let you hear that in context and in isolation too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted October 23, 2014 Author Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 That'd be cool. I might have some time on Sunday. Really busy until then. Thanks, Phil!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 Hey Guys, Lets ease up on Tim. I know he is going through a rough spot right now, some family issues to attend to and I`m sure its draining him emotionally and mentally. Lets not beat him up over this. Peace,EB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members WRGKMC Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 I was listening to some pop tune on the radio here at work someone was playing. I didn't know that band but the chick singer's voice was so over produced it was annoying to my nerves. I've worked with enough great singers to know what's natural and what's not. every word was carefully cropped, auto tuned, compressed until its sounded completely robotic. There wasn't a single change in dynamics and they could have easily pasted in the exact same chorus lines in throughout the song. All the time I'm listening I was thinking this check must be very hot for those engineers to proper her up as much as they did. I doubt she sounds much better then some college kid amateur in a talent show without all that heavy makeup (audio makeup) I don't care what people do to make themselves sound good and If I'm paid to do it I'll get out the putty knife and layer it on, but no one is going to fake me into thinking that person actually has talent, at least not at this point. Maybe 5~10 years when she can become talented enough to do it without all the audio tricks I'll have some interest in the music but lets face it. If you cant spot an amateur hiding under that processing, than maybe you need to take a break from that pop and listen to some talented artists that don't need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 Why does anybody have to be trying to fake you into thinking anything? Isn't it possible that that's just the way the producers wanted the vocal track to sound regardless of the level of talent of the singer? Sometimes really pretty girls wear way too much makeup too. Especially if it's fashionable to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 I was listening to some pop tune on the radio here at work someone was playing. I didn't know that band but the chick singer's voice was so over produced it was annoying to my nerves. I've worked with enough great singers to know what's natural and what's not. every word was carefully cropped, auto tuned, compressed until its sounded completely robotic. There wasn't a single change in dynamics and they could have easily pasted in the exact same chorus lines in throughout the song. All the time I'm listening I was thinking this check must be very hot for those engineers to proper her up as much as they did. I doubt she sounds much better then some college kid amateur in a talent show without all that heavy makeup (audio makeup) I don't care what people do to make themselves sound good and If I'm paid to do it I'll get out the putty knife and layer it on, but no one is going to fake me into thinking that person actually has talent, at least not at this point. Maybe 5~10 years when she can become talented enough to do it without all the audio tricks I'll have some interest in the music but lets face it. If you cant spot an amateur hiding under that processing, than maybe you need to take a break from that pop and listen to some talented artists that don't need it. hmmm... [video=youtube_share;vTnWFT3DvVA] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 Why does anybody have to be trying to fake you into thinking anything? Isn't it possible that that's just the way the producers wanted the vocal track to sound regardless of the level of talent of the singer? Sometimes really pretty girls wear way too much makeup too. Especially if it's fashionable to do so. I agree. I don`t wear lots of makeup but when I do! No really, I`ve been using a little bit of AT here on there on songs because I like the affect. Its not biggie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 I'm not even a producer or engineer, but even I take a bit of offense at the suggestion that if there's audible autotune and other effects on a modern pop vocal track that it must be because the producer has nefarious motives and is somehow trying to trick us all into thinking that some no talent is really the 2nd coming of Ella Fitzgerald. Also---it's one thing to not like the sound of a particular recording or producing style. We all have our personal preferences. But to go out of your way to portray that style as somehow objectively inferior......what's that all about, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vito Corleone Posted October 23, 2014 Members Share Posted October 23, 2014 hmmm... [video=youtube_share;vTnWFT3DvVA] Carrie's got too much makeup. I don't think that's all her own natural hair color and curls either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.