"We Are The World" - 25 Years Later

[UstadKhanAli]

The difference with autotune is that most people don't realize what it is And how can you care about something that you don't even know - or understand - exists?

 

So his submission is that - despite thousands of articles covering this - people don't know about AutoTune. I disagree. I've already provided links to many mainstream newspaper and magazine articles that discuss AutoTune, so we're not going to beat that horse to death again.

 

And again, for the umpteenth time, I do not like the sound of AutoTune. I don't use AutoTune. I don't have AutoTune. I am not defending AutoTune. Apparently when you disagree with someone who doesn't like AutoTune, you automatically become a shill for AutoTune. Sorry, that's an AutoArgument.

[UstadKhanAli]

When people claim it sucks, that's because they can't recognize when it's being applied tastefully.

 

 

Exactly. Because you are minimizing or eradicating artifacts.

[UstadKhanAli]

EDIT: I don't necessarily agree that it's "fraud," but that's cuz I use it too

I really can see Jotown's point in how its use can sometimes be fraudulent. Just because I disagree with him on a couple of his points doesn't mean I disagree with him entirely. Don't get me wrong...I am not an "extremist". I get why people use AutoTune, why certain situations would call for someone to tastefully correct a note or two, why people feel it sounds modern, and a bunch of other reasons. My position is simply this: I don't like the sound and feel it's insanely overused and tired sounding...not much different from the opinions that have been expressed by others.

[Jotown]

As I've always said about Auto-Tune... When people claim it sucks, that's because they can't recognize when it's being applied tastefully. I've used pitch correction in a few places on my vocals...I think probably less than a dozen times...and I don't think anyone could pick those instances out because a) any notes weren't off that much in the first place, so it didn't have to shift a lot and b) it's maybe one or two notes out of a song. By the time they've flown past, your ear is attracted by something else. 90% of the time when I use pitch correction, it's on the last note of a phrase.

And I have no problem with using it that way. As a tool in an engineers toolkit to subtley tweak an otherwise good vocal perfomance in the way you describe it is a great thing. I have always said that in these discussions.

 

As a mask (as in Jason Bieber in the "We are the world song") in which you can hear that every note in his performance is being processed it is an abomination. I know that any engineer or sound professional worth their salt understands what I am saying and hears it imediately.

 

Now Craig; with all due respect. It is clear your comment is directed at me. I definitely CAN "recognize when it's being applied tastefully." And I can also recognize when it's not. I know that in the case of Jason Bieber; it is not being used tastefully. And I have heard him sing on a televised performance more than once in which it is clear that he is not a very good singer.

 

I know (as anyone who has ears and know what a tuned voice sounds like) that they have to tune his entire performance because he is not very good. I also know that you know this. I will let others try to figure out why someone with the ears and experience that you have would choose to pretend that the emperor has new clothes when it is clear that he is naked. I will keep my own theories to myself.

[UstadKhanAli]

And I have no problem with using it that way. As a tool in an engineers toolkit to subtley tweak an otherwise good vocal perfomance in the way you describe it is a great thing. I have always said that in these discussions.

I don't have a problem with that either -- not that anyone needs my approval! I don't do that personally, but I can totally see where it would be extremely beneficial.

[AwayEam]

So his submission is that - despite thousands of articles covering this - people don't know about AutoTune. I disagree. I've already provided links to many mainstream newspaper and magazine articles that discuss AutoTune, so we're not going to beat that horse to death again.

 

 

HEY BRO

 

I thought your replies to Brotown seemed a little more aggressive than was called for :poke:

 

I read his posts differently. I'm pretty sure he didn't mean "devoid of artifacts" literally, and I'm also pretty sure he wasn't suggesting that most people don't know Autotune exists.

 

Unless I'm completely misunderstanding, he was simply saying the same thing I was: most people can't identify Autotune in a song if it's not in blatant robotic mode.

[AwayEam]

I really can see Jotown's point in how its use can sometimes be fraudulent. Just because I disagree with him on a couple of his points doesn't mean I disagree with him entirely. Don't get me wrong...I am not an "extremist". I get why people use AutoTune, why certain situations would call for someone to tastefully correct a note or two, why people feel it sounds modern, and a bunch of other reasons. My position is simply this: I don't like the sound and feel it's insanely overused and tired sounding...not much different from the opinions that have been expressed by others.

 

HEY AGAIN BRO

 

I don't really disagree with any of this. And if I'm completely honest, I do let pitch correction make me a little lazy when it comes to vocal tracking. I am making an effort to get better though

 

And while I'm being so honest, I'll also add that I sometimes use it to clean up vocals from people who have no business being in front of a mic. Fraud in the highest degree, no question :facepalm:

[Jotown]

I'm pretty sure he didn't mean "devoid of artifacts" literally, and I'm also pretty sure he wasn't suggesting that most people don't know Autotune exists. Unless I'm completely misunderstanding, he was simply saying the same thing I was: most people can't identify Autotune in a song if it's not in blatant robotic mode.

And that is exactly what I was saying, and exactly how I said it. I am glad that someone here actually read and understood what I have repeatedly said on the issue of autotune.

 

Thanks for chiming in. Also thank you for your honesty. I don't know an engineer who doesn't use it as you describe. It is just nice to hear someone admit it and, also admit what it is.

[UstadKhanAli]

From my own experience in talking to many people about this, I am all but certain that the vast majority of people cannot detect pitch correction when it is devoid of artifacts.

Just wondering.

Thanks for chiming in. Also thank you for your honesty. I don't know an engineer who doesn't use it as you describe. It is just nice to hear someone admit it and, also admit what it is.

Well, gee, I'm honest too...I can't use it because I don't own it!!!

[UstadKhanAli]

HEY BRO I thought your replies to Brotown seemed a little more aggressive than was called for :poke:

 

 

Yeah, you're probably quite right. I expressed some irritation because the inference is that people are ignorant, and that's just not a place that I come from. Maybe it's because I'm a teacher, I don't know, but it wasn't just from this thread. It's been a general theme that I find annoying in respect to music listeners. Maybe the jillions of articles casually mentioning autotune has biased me, I don't know, but my perspective is 180 degrees different from his. At any rate, I've tried to tone it down.

[ChrisAlgoo]

This. Next thing ya know, all the metal dudes will go re-record "We Are Stars" for Haiti

God, I hope so!

[Congoman]

I was just watching epic crashes in Olympic skiing. When I listen to someone like Justin Beaver I feel like someone at the studio stopped the tape, picked up the skier, dusted her off, and let her keep skiing - 430 times - until she won the gold.

But that's life, and while I'll mock it I'm not going to stress about it.

[Gus Lozada]

Nobody understands why I start helicopter vomiting whenever a character starts singing in Glee

+ 1

[Anderton]

Now Craig; with all due respect. It is clear your comment is directed at me. I definitely CAN "recognize when it's being applied tastefully." And I can also recognize when it's not. I know that in the case of Jason Bieber; it is not being used tastefully. And I have heard him sing on a televised performance more than once in which it is clear that he is not a very good singer.

 

 

Actually that comment was not even remotely directed at you (I wasn't even thinking of what you've said at the time), but at all the people who say "pitch correction sucks." To dismiss an entire technology based solely on people who misapply it seems short-sighted.

 

Now this may sound pretty bizarre, but...my #1 application for Sonar's V-Vocal is adding slides to bass, and slight pitch variations when I'm going for a fretless bass sound. As long as a sound source is mono, you can do pretty amazing things with V-Vocal, even if it has nothing to do with voice.

[Synonym Music]

Actually that comment was not even remotely directed at you (I wasn't even thinking of what you've said at the time), but at all the people who say "pitch correction sucks." To dismiss an entire technology based solely on people who misapply it seems short-sighted. Now this may sound pretty bizarre, but...my #1 application for Sonar's V-Vocal is adding slides to bass, and slight pitch variations when I'm going for a fretless bass sound. As long as a sound source is mono, you can do pretty amazing things with V-Vocal, even if it has nothing to do with voice.

 

Unfortunately it's not being misapplied anymore. If you hear it (or not), you were more than likely meant to. I don't see how any of tuning in WATW 25 is meant to fool anybody. It's extremely stark.

 

The previous pop trends didn't ruin the music for me, even if some songs became heavily dated. When set to stun and not used as an aesthetic, this is just... Making good singers sound worse. What's so fashionable about that?

[Jotown]

Actually that comment was not even remotely directed at you (I wasn't even thinking of what you've said at the time), but at all the people who say "pitch correction sucks." To dismiss an entire technology based solely on people who misapply it seems short-sighted.

You posted right after I did so a thought you were referring to my post. But this thread is about "We are the world 2010" so generatlities about pitch correction are not helpeful. If you haven't yet, watch the video. Listen to the people (not the blatant robotic rapping autotune) but the singers. Listen to the first singer (Jason Bieber) and tell me that was a tasteful and musical application of pitch correction.

Everytime this topic comes up most just dodge the truth of it. Maybe because you are subsidised by some of these vendors it is hard for you to be objective. But we are long past talking about the blatant robotic use, and the tasteful corrective use of pitch correction.

We are at the point were most of the pop records you hear are treated form front to back. The average listener probably does not detect it, but anybody in the music biz does. It sounds like a some has put a condom on a singers voice. It has that encapsulated sheen that sounds anything but human.

Hey Bro's aside to "Glee" is a classic example of this. Why do audio professionals shy away from calling it what it is? Why do you dodge this obvious question? I know people tune other instruments with it. I know that people, can use it tastefully and correctivley. But that is never what those who dislike it complain about. Yet it is almost never what you comment on.

Help me here as I am just trying to understand how someone with your ears can't hear this.

[UstadKhanAli]

Everytime this topic comes up most just dodge the truth of it. Maybe because you are subsidised by some of these vendors it is hard for you to be objective. But we are long past talking about the blatant robotic use, and the tasteful corrective use of pitch correction.

 

 

Oh please spare me the "you can't handle the truth" bit. People are just expressing opinions. A lot of us have repeatedly said that we don't like the sound anyway, but I don't even know if you have acknowledged this. Anyway, this sort of "you're a shill of the vendors" bit is so facile and tired. As is this "discussion".

[Anderton]

You posted right after I did so a thought you were referring to my post. But this thread is about "We are the world 2010" so generatlities about pitch correction are not helpeful.

Threads often take worthwhile detours.

If you haven't yet, watch the video. Listen to the people (not the blatant robotic rapping autotune) but the singers. Listen to the first singer (Jason Bieber) and tell me that was a tasteful and musical application of pitch correction.

I've seen the video. They can do whatever they want. I can choose whether to listen to it or not. I choose not to.

Everytime this topic comes up most just dodge the truth of it. Maybe because you are subsidised by some of these vendors it is hard for you to be objective.

Are you serious, or is that a laugh line?

What's more objective than being against misuse of technology - whether it's Beat Detective, excessive quantization, excessive pitch correction, excessive use of gated reverb, you name - and being in favor of the appropriate use of technology? That's been a consistent theme throughout my writing for decades. What's more, I take it one step further, and actually try to educate people on the appropriate use of technology.

Have you seen me write ONE SENTENCE about how to use pitch correction to create robot voices?

No, you haven't. Because I haven't.

We are at the point were most of the pop records you hear are treated form front to back. The average listener probably does not detect it, but anybody in the music biz does. It sounds like a some has put a condom on a singers voice. It has that encapsulated sheen that sounds anything but human.

So what? It's a free country. They can choose to do it, just as I can choose not to do it.

How many times have I spoken out against overcompression in mastering? And now there's starting to be a backlash and people are dialing back on the squashing. Is it because of what I said? No, it's because enough people started saying "hey, this sounds like crap." As will happen with pitch correction once the novelty wears off, which is imminent anyway. Fads are fads; they come, they go. I already said that pitch correction is going to date this music.

Why do audio professionals shy away from calling it what it is? Why do you dodge this obvious question?

I've never dodged the question, but I suspect that you might consider "dodging" not answering your question the way you would like me to answer it. Besides, I've already said everything I have to say about the subject. I'm not into beating dead horses, so let me say it once more:

It's a free country. They can choose to do to use pitch correction the way they want, just as I can choose to use it the way I want.

That strikes me as a fairly easy-to-understand, unambiguous position.

I know people tune other instruments with it. I know that people, can use it tastefully and correctivley. But that is never what those who dislike it complain about. Yet it is almost never what you comment on.

I don't impose my tastes on others. If I did, most radio stations would play the Brandenburgs, Miles Davis, Jimi Hendrix, and Buddy Holly. And what more of a comment is needed than I don't like technology when it's abused, and I do like technology when it's applied properly? That's all I need to say, and even that is a totally subjective viewpoint, so I'm not about to claim that I Hold The Truth and All Must Bow Down Before Me.

Help me here as I am just trying to understand how someone with your ears can't hear this.

I have no idea why you assume I can't hear it. Of course I can hear it. How I react to it seems to be what you're unhappy about, that I'm not climbing some soapbox every time the topic comes up and railing against misuse of pitch correction. Been there, done that, and it gets tiresome.

I'd rather point out how to use something properly and make a positive contribution than just complain about something that I can't change anyway. Do you really think that if I bitch about it, some producer is going to read this and say "Ohmigod, I've been a bad person, I will stop doing this over-correction thing immediately! Oh thank you Craig! I apologize from the depths of my heart!"? Of course not. But, I think the odds are pretty good that someone reading this thread will think "Hmmm, bass slides...that sounds cool...think I'll give it a shot."

There are vastly more important things to be concerned about than whether people are using pitch correction in accordance with MY standards of how pitch correction should be used.

I believe in freedom of choice. It's that simple. If they want to suck the life out of a rhythm track by overquantizing it, turn vocalists into robots, and squash the crap out of the master, fine. As long as they don't say I MUST do it, then I'm not arrogant enough to tell them they MUST NOT do it. Although I might suggest that they not do it

[Jeff da Weasel]

This thread has high comedy.

[Anderton]

So you think it WAS a laugh line?

[AwayEam]

HEY BROS

Haha yeah, this is getting a bit ridiculous

I'm totally down with radio stations playing lots of Buddy Holly though!

[Jeff da Weasel]

So you think it WAS a laugh line?

Not at all, but unintentional comedy is usually the best kind.

[UstadKhanAli]

HEY BROS Haha yeah, this is getting a bit ridiculous I'm totally down with radio stations playing lots of Buddy Holly though!

And Miles Davis!!!!!!

[Gus Lozada]

In case you guys did not have enough on this...

 

"Somos El Mundo", a.k.a. "We Are The -Third- World" in Spanish.

 

Enjoy!:

 

[YOUTUBE]A4iOqZFoj0g[/YOUTUBE]

 

[locust tree]

Here's my likely too-little, too-late contribution to this thread:

In my experience, the massive media coverage (and resultant household name status of) Autotune have still failed to educate the general music-listening public as to what it actually does. If it's anything falling short of the turned-to-11 massive stairstepping effect as used in hip hop, the average listener can't detect it. Plain and simple.

Could the average listener learn to hear it with simple A/B testing? Absolutely. Look what

did to raise awareness for the general public and affect change. (For those interested in a direct result of that change, check out Turn Me Up.) As it stands right now, though, there isn't really a viral video that breaks down all of Autotune's more "subtle" uses. (I put quotes around subtle because my fellow engineers with an ear for formant-mangling would use more brash adjectives.)

As far as the Big Media spun version of the issue, yes, it's true, Autotune has allowed less-than-talented singers to sound... well, Autotuned. I'm not going to say "good" because that's a subjective word and my subjective experience with Autotune and its many artifacts has been less than pleasing.

Among us engineers though, I think the deeper, less sensational issue is the creation of an industry zeitgeist that puts this sheen on everyone - even the talented. I picked up the new John Mayer record and I'm hearing amounts of tuning I've never heard on his voice before. I have to wonder if songs with Autotuned vocals just test better in focus groups because they sound more modern. It's like my old high school jazz band director said - if you're out of tune, the audience isn't necessarily going to know why you sound bad. They will, however, know that you sound bad. On the opposite end, a layperson might not know that it's Autotune making a vocal sound slick and modern, but they will know that it sounds slick and modern.

If anything, the original We Are the World stands in pretty stark relief as the definitive statement that the music industry did great before this invention, and like most corrective tools, it should probably reserved for the singers that actually need it.