Poll: Auto tune or no
Poll Options
View poll results: Auto tune or no
Yes
7 8%
No
51 61%
Try it
21 25%
If cant sing upbeat stuff stick to the slow stuff.
4 5%
Voters: 83.
Page 1 of 2
guitarpoplin
Registered User
Join date: Dec 2008
412 IQ
#1
Hey Guys,
I have a question,

Our front man is ok at singing and we are getting at the point where we wanna write our own music and stuff. he sings good for slower stuff and not so distorted. but when it comes to upbeatish stuff he does not do so good.

we are wondering should we go to auto tune and use that to help out to our Electronica sound?

please write back cause all info will help.
Ramblin'_Man
UG's Reggae fanatic
Join date: Feb 2007
1,959 IQ
#3
If you can use it correctly, and appropriately it can add to a song, but if it is overdone and overproduced, i.e. T-Pain and Kanye West, it is just awful. There are many good electronica-instrumental bands out there that don't use auto-tune, I suggest checkign them out. Here's a very small list:

STS9 (Sound Tribe Sector 9)
Lotus
Disco Biscuits (I don't like them, but many people do)
Infected Mushroom
Umphrey's McGee (on a limited # of songs)
Ronald Jenkees
Galactic (on Ruckus)
MGMT (I think they're kinda meh, but you can't ignore them)
EOTO
CODE
Registered User
Join date: Apr 2006
925 IQ
#4
Don't do the t-pain stuff. It is an overused effect, you aren't going anywhere by using it.

Auto-tune is perfectly fine when recording vocals. There are imperfections in almost every vocal
take, auto-tune is made to fix those if that is what you are going for.
JDizzle787
Color me impressed
Join date: May 2008
1,664 IQ
#5
well, even to get that "T-Pain" sound, as demonstrated on a youtube video about auto-tune and debunking how it works, you still have to be a very good singer. you can sound like crap and auto tune, and it will still sound like crap. I do second that I've heard that it is good for covering up imperfections though.
guitarpoplin
Registered User
Join date: Dec 2008
412 IQ
#7
not into the screaming. it would be more upbeatish with guitars and bass and more dancing type music but in a rock way with cool synths. dont know how to explain it lol.
take_it_t
Music Addict
Join date: Mar 2005
818 IQ
#9
I can't understand how a song being upbeat would have any effect on your singer's ability to hit pitches.
Souls United
Registered User
Join date: Jan 2008
234 IQ
#10
Quote by take_it_t
I can't understand how a song being upbeat would have any effect on your singer's ability to hit pitches.

Yeah, me either man.

Sounds like a problem with his style. Also this should go in the vocals section of musician talk.
its_alive
What Would Jimi Do?
Join date: May 2007
548 IQ
#12
^lol.
If you think it'll help, you might as well go for it. Other than that though, I really dislike it.
blue_strat
UG Amplified Editor
Join date: Feb 2006
1,481 IQ
#13
Everything is fair play these days. If the end-product sounds good, then go for it.
the humanity
A Political Man
Join date: Jun 2007
3,177 IQ
#14
try bitcrusher instead.
Quote by FatalGear41
I wouldn't call what we have here on the Bass Forum a mentality. It's more like the sharing part of an AA meeting.

Quote by Jason Jillard
HUMANITY WHATS WRONG WITH YOU.


Warwick Fortress>>Acoustic AB50

http://www.myspace.com/rustingbloom
Syphen
Registered User
Join date: Dec 2009
10 IQ
#15
no autotune.

please for the heavens.

instead of trying a gimmick, just work on changing the overall musical direction or the way hes approaching the song.

there are plenty of ways to go about playing upbeat music. if you are trying to mimic a certain style or sound of another band then its a very good possibility he just doesnt have the voice to pull it off.

find out exactly where he shines vocally, and then work on creating a more upbeat style that his voice would fit into, rather than a style of music that is obviously not made for his voice.

giving him something that covers his mistakes or his lack of ability will make him become reliant upon that instead of actually improving his singing.

or then again.

use it. and try to get as many teenage girls as possible. while everyone else just shakes their head.

or.

change the music slightly

get him to practice the vocals

be in a band that actually will have staying power

and get all the girls.


decisions decisions
muddymoose
Your Mom
Join date: Dec 2009
10 IQ
#16
Autotune is the devil.
BC Rich NJ Deluxe Warbeast
Fender Super Champ XD
blue_strat
UG Amplified Editor
Join date: Feb 2006
1,481 IQ
#17
Quote by muddymoose
Autotune is the devil.

Bandwagoning is the devil.
muddymoose
Your Mom
Join date: Dec 2009
10 IQ
#18
Quote by blue_strat
Bandwagoning is the devil.

Bandwagoning on the anti-bandwagoning bandwagon is the devil.

Anyway it was an interesting gimmick when it first surfaced, but now it's become cliche in pop music and it needs to go away. Since I've had this opinion for years, I don't see the bandwagoning you speak of. I do, however, realize I slightly necroposted this. Apologies.
BC Rich NJ Deluxe Warbeast
Fender Super Champ XD
Last edited by muddymoose at Jan 8, 2010,
JackFlash19
Doin it big
Join date: Mar 2004
893 IQ
#19
You people are retarded. Autotune is to help salvage records of those singers who can't hit the notes exactly. Simply because T-pain and all those other fad-tastic bullshtters use the extreme limits of autotune does not and should not downgrade the usefulness of autotune for a vocalist. Nearly EVERY producer/engineer uses autotune or some form of it to strengthen the musical quality of the records they produce. If you want a quality sounding album, use it. Even if the vocalist doesn't necessarily need it, use it to clean up the microscopic parts he deviated pitch on.

Please don't get on the anti-bandwagon bandwagon and ignorantly follow what other auto-tune-haters state, simply to seem like you are cool and rebellious. Autotune is a tool of professionals. It is also a tool of artists. Just the same as you can make an audio file unique with autotune you can also make an image file unique with photoshop. It is not a bad thing. It is not the devil. It is all in how you use it.

It is NOT a gimmick. Autotune has been around a LOT longer than t-pain. People think autotune is a cliche or a fad. They don't realize because of their ignorance that autotune is not a fad. It is the OVEREXTENSION of autotune that is the fad.

Please be intelligent about the subject matter you speak about before stating your opinion as 'fact'
muddymoose
Your Mom
Join date: Dec 2009
10 IQ
#20
Quote by JackFlash19
Autotune is to help salvage records of those singers who can't hit the notes exactly.

I know that.

Quote by JackFlash19
Simply because T-pain and all those other fad-tastic bullshtters use the extreme limits of autotune does not and should not downgrade the usefulness of autotune for a vocalist.

I guess I should have said "*The abuse of* autotune is the devil", but I thought that was obvious.

Quote by JackFlash19
Please don't get on the anti-bandwagon bandwagon and ignorantly follow what other auto-tune-haters state, simply to seem like you are cool and rebellious.

I've always been amused that whenever two or more people come together and agree on something, there's automatically some sort of magical bandwagon involved. If you agree that the overuse of autotune is the devil, then you're on this bandwagon too.
BC Rich NJ Deluxe Warbeast
Fender Super Champ XD
Withakay
Invisible
Join date: Jan 2008
26 IQ
#21
Quote by guitarpoplin
should we go to auto tune and use that to help out to our Electronica sound?
I hate it when 'out of tune' songs make the radio. To me that is both a producer and a radio programmer failing at their job. Out of tune notes almost physically hurt me.

That said, I don't like auto-tune either. It was a fun gimmick when Cher used it in 'Believe', but now all the songs using the extreme auto-tune setting sound like an obvious déjà-vu. This sound will not age well. Those songs will be buried along with seventies' clothing and fifties' wallpaper as testaments of bad taste.

But what really bothers me with auto-tune is the deception. It falsely lets you believe the singer can actually sing. What's the difference with Madonna, Britney Spears and Milli Vanilli pretending to be singing live shows while (most of the time) they're lip-synching? For any musician it is hard to respect that. (Even if above mentioned artist have other qualities).

The simple truth is: if you can't play the guitar, you shouldn't pretend to either. If you can't sing in tune, you have no business being a singer.
Quote by take_it_t
I can't understand how a song being upbeat would have any effect on your singer's ability to hit pitches.
Because when you sing faster it's harder to get the pitch right every single time.

But this is actually an encouraging clue. If your singer can sing fairly well during slower parts, that means he has the ability to sing in tune. He can get better with practice.
Black Star
UG Fanatic
Join date: Dec 2005
376 IQ
#22
Quote by Withakay
I hate it when 'out of tune' songs make the radio. To me that is both a producer and a radio programmer failing at their job. Out of tune notes almost physically hurt me.

That said, I don't like auto-tune either. It was a fun gimmick when Cher used it in 'Believe', but now all the songs using the extreme auto-tune setting sound like an obvious déjà-vu. This sound will not age well. Those songs will be buried along with seventies' clothing and fifties' wallpaper as testaments of bad taste.

But what really bothers me with auto-tune is the deception. It falsely lets you believe the singer can actually sing. What's the difference with Madonna, Britney Spears and Milli Vanilli pretending to be singing live shows while (most of the time) they're lip-synching? For any musician it is hard to respect that. (Even if above mentioned artist have other qualities).

The simple truth is: if you can't play the guitar, you shouldn't pretend to either. If you can't sing in tune, you have no business being a singer.
Because when you sing faster it's harder to get the pitch right every single time.

But this is actually an encouraging clue. If your singer can sing fairly well during slower parts, that means he has the ability to sing in tune. He can get better with practice.


I was getting worried in this thread. Everybody was shooting down the anti-autotuners simply because of bandwagoning.

In my opinion, autotune sounds like total shit. Even when it's done subtlely, I kind of like hearing slight (slight) imperfections in my music. Listen to The Beatles. There's a number of songs where Paul doesn't sing perfect, but it still sounds good. Off the top of my head, Let it Be comes to mind, though I know there are countless more. The imperfections make the song more personal: more human.

If you have the ability to sing, you should sing, without autotune. If you can't sing, you have no business acting like you can in the first place.

Also, what's going to happen when you play live? Lip-sync?

HOWEVER: Autotune can work in electronica music. But then, do you want to sound like every other electronica band?
My guitar modification blog.
Quote by MuffinMan
Jesus was all like "To those about to rock, I salute you." then he grabbed his mighty axe and rocked the Romans out really hard. Of course they were strict classical music so....
Last edited by Black Star at Jan 8, 2010,
axemanchris
Awwww.... NOW what?!
Join date: Aug 2006
2,471 IQ
#23
I'm going to take a bit of an issue with the Madonna example. She was around before anyone even dreamed that a computer could correct pitch difficulties. She *can* sing.

Now, I wouldn't find it surprising, in spite of that, to find out that she lip syncs her shows. I think the reason for that is that a Madonna show (or a Brittney Spears show, or a Janet Jackson show or whatever) isn't about the singing. It's about the *show.* It's the dancing, the costumes, the choreography, the staging, the lighting, etc. The singing is - I was going to say secondary - really only tertiary. People know she isn't singing, but they're okay with that. So, if everyone is okay with that, then why not?

And really... If I was a Madonna fan, I would rather see her perform her show perfectly and give me what I want and lip sync the show than have her come out and sound all winded for the last half of the show, as a result of the dancing that she does. That would actually begin to *detract* from the show, because it would be obviously bad, as opposed to "close enough to suspend my disbelief for an hour or so."

Now, if I go see a rock band, people *expect* them to be singing and playing their own instruments. The staging and lights and all that are part of the show, sure, but they are not THE show. The most important thing in one of those shows IS the music, which includes the singing.

It's just one of those things that goes along with a different genre of music is the different expectations for the live performance of said show.

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
isaac_bandits
𝄢
Join date: Apr 2007
194 IQ
#24
I don't see why not. You probably want to just use it to correct the pitch, and not to get the T-Payne kind of effect. You can use it just to correct pitch, and you won't even notice that the singer's using it, it will just sound like they can hit all the pitches right on.
HeavyReverb
UG's Acid Trip
Join date: Dec 2007
976 IQ
#25
Quote by the humanity
try bitcrusher instead.


high five
1 2

Little solace comes
to those who grieve
as thoughts keep drifting
as walls keep shifting
and this great blue world of ours
seems a House of Leaves

My Rig
Quote by Will Swanson
HeavyReverb = Hero of The Pit 2010.
Quote by I-Shot-Jr
You sir are my absolute hero.
Black Star
UG Fanatic
Join date: Dec 2005
376 IQ
#26
Quote by isaac_bandits
I don't see why not. You probably want to just use it to correct the pitch, and not to get the T-Payne kind of effect. You can use it just to correct pitch, and you won't even notice that the singer's using it, it will just sound like they can hit all the pitches right on.


Actually, most of the time, it is painfully obvious when someone is using autotune. However, the closer the person is to the right pitch in the first place, the less obvious it is. Of course, the only way to make autotune completely unnoticeable is to be singing on pitch in the first place, in which case you wouldn't need autotune anyways.
My guitar modification blog.
Quote by MuffinMan
Jesus was all like "To those about to rock, I salute you." then he grabbed his mighty axe and rocked the Romans out really hard. Of course they were strict classical music so....
isaac_bandits
𝄢
Join date: Apr 2007
194 IQ
#27
Quote by Black Star
Actually, most of the time, it is painfully obvious when someone is using autotune. However, the closer the person is to the right pitch in the first place, the less obvious it is. Of course, the only way to make autotune completely unnoticeable is to be singing on pitch in the first place, in which case you wouldn't need autotune anyways.


Its still a fail-safe. Alot of professionals use it, when they don't need it, just in case.
dst127
Hi!
Join date: Apr 2007
244 IQ
#28
There is nothing inherently wrong with using autotune, but your singer needs to learn how to sing without it. It is fine to use autotune as a tool, but don't use it as a crutch.

Best of luck with your band.
JackFlash19
Doin it big
Join date: Mar 2004
893 IQ
#29
Quote by muddymoose
I know that.


Good for you. Do want a cookie?


Quote by muddymoose
guess I should have said "*The abuse of* autotune is the devil", but I thought that was obvious.


You may think you are the only person, but there are MANY purists out there who are against auto-tune, even if the pitch correction is extremely minor. You probably don't fully realize the extent that auto-tune and pitch correction is ACTUALLY used in the industry, but I'll let it slide because I'm sure your excuse is that you're just young.


Quote by muddymoose
always been amused that whenever two or more people come together and agree on something, there's automatically some sort of magical bandwagon involved. If you agree that the overuse of autotune is the devil, then you're on this bandwagon too.


funny you say that, because the title of this thread is not "the overuse of autotune". Please generalize this discussion to fit what you think it's about rather than what it actually is. Your ignorance is a waste of my time.

Quote by Black Star

Actually, most of the time, it is painfully obvious when someone is using autotune. However, the closer the person is to the right pitch in the first place, the less obvious it is. Of course, the only way to make autotune completely unnoticeable is to be singing on pitch in the first place, in which case you wouldn't need autotune anyways.


..........ACTUALLY it is not 'painfully obvious' when someone is using autotune. Go ahead and pat yourself on the back a little harder because of your perfect ear to hear not only the millisecond pitch shifts it executes, but that you can tell the difference which songs use autotune and which ones don't......


.....No go ahead, keep patting.....I'll wait till you are done.............


95% of producers, engineers, labels, and bands DO use autotune before they finish putting out their cd. It is almost an industry standard that autotune is applied to tracks before they are mastered. I don't understand why people are happy with flat notes and the inability to hit pitches. Does it make the song that much more enjoyable for you to know that the song is totally raw and sounds like sht? Get off your high horse. More than likely, if a vocalist is out of tune in a recorded song, it is NOT because they are trying to be natural, it's because autotune could not effectively correct the pitch without the noticeable pitch shift sounds. They just actually suck that bad.

Granted, yes our goal is to sound as perfect on stage as we do on compact disc, but to sell cds and make them the most appealing to all audiences (mainly those with the ears of perfect pitch) you have to use software to correct MISTAKES. Because that is what they are. Pitch mistakes.......

So if your drummer is having a difficult time hitting the rhythm perfectly of your triple bass lines and it sounds sloppy, (since you are so anti-autotune 'bandwagon'.....and please retort with another bandwagon comment. That would be great with your superior intellect.....) you would rather KEEP the sloppy drum part than waste time in the studio with him playing it over and over and over and over and over? Or would you have the engineer run drumagog on it and correct all the triple bass hits to the time they are supposed to be in? Because that is exactly the same thing vocalists are doing with autotune. Most engineers will autotune songs without a second thought or notice that it's happening.

Nearly EVERY single song on the radio has been run through auto-tune. Don't kid yourself. You CAN'T painfully spot when autotune is used, despite that your prideful and false self-image thinks you can.
Damascus
The Insect King
Join date: Mar 2007
307 IQ
#30
I think it's clear where this thread has to go - someone needs to set up blind auto-tune detection tests. That'd be awesome.


Also:
Quote by JackFlash19
95% of producers, engineers, labels, and bands DO use autotune before they finish putting out their cd. It is almost an industry standard that autotune is applied to tracks before they are mastered.

How do you know that? Not in a bitchy-I-think-you're-lying way, just a genuine I'm-interested-in-how-you-learnt-that way.
Quote by Ed O'Brien
“It’s not genius. It’s just that if you want something good to come out of something, you have to put in a lot of effort. That involves a lot of hard work, and a lot of blood, sweat and tears sometimes.”

http://urbanscarecrow.bandcamp.com/
Lams
Registered User
Join date: Nov 2006
160 IQ
#31
Quote by JackFlash19



95% of producers, engineers, labels, and bands DO use autotune before they finish putting out their cd. It is almost an industry standard that autotune is applied to tracks before they are mastered. I don't understand why people are happy with flat notes and the inability to hit pitches. Does it make the song that much more enjoyable for you to know that the song is totally raw and sounds like sht? Get off your high horse. More than likely, if a vocalist is out of tune in a recorded song, it is NOT because they are trying to be natural, it's because autotune could not effectively correct the pitch without the noticeable pitch shift sounds. They just actually suck that bad.

Granted, yes our goal is to sound as perfect on stage as we do on compact disc, but to sell cds and make them the most appealing to all audiences (mainly those with the ears of perfect pitch) you have to use software to correct MISTAKES. Because that is what they are. Pitch mistakes.......

So if your drummer is having a difficult time hitting the rhythm perfectly of your triple bass lines and it sounds sloppy, (since you are so anti-autotune 'bandwagon'.....and please retort with another bandwagon comment. That would be great with your superior intellect.....) you would rather KEEP the sloppy drum part than waste time in the studio with him playing it over and over and over and over and over? Or would you have the engineer run drumagog on it and correct all the triple bass hits to the time they are supposed to be in? Because that is exactly the same thing vocalists are doing with autotune. Most engineers will autotune songs without a second thought or notice that it's happening.

Nearly EVERY single song on the radio has been run through auto-tune. Don't kid yourself. You CAN'T painfully spot when autotune is used, despite that your prideful and false self-image thinks you can.


so when you record something, you're recording it for those people with perfect pitch? no wonder you're on an internet forum and not on tour rocking out, if you main target is "mainly those with the ears of perfect pitch".
Also i guess you're not a fan of the lo-fi genre? and live takes? do you know that some bands, besides those on mtv and i guess, radio, actually record stuff without overdubs and digital stuff? i'm not saying it sounds better, but it's not a rule to use all the technology possible to sound good. the white stripes have made it to most of the "best of the decade" lists and they don't use auto tune. it's note a rule.
and i second the justification of that 95% number, and it's on a bitchy-I-think-you're-lying way. it seems that all the music you're considering is those bands who are on the big labels, but there's world outside that
no way
axemanchris
Awwww.... NOW what?!
Join date: Aug 2006
2,471 IQ
#32
Although the tone is rather biting, I do agree with JackFlash. The major labels want perfectly tuned vocals, and they will impose it if they want it. They are the sort of entity that will even add it after the fact, even if the band doesn't want it. The band can pat themselves on the back for not using it, the label gets a perfect product, and the producer quietly cashes his paycheque and keeps his mouth shut, because his reputation is his future business.

When autotune (or Melodyne, which is even better) is used for *minor* pitch correction, and used judiciously, I would defy *anyone* to pick it out. *Anyone.* You don't hear it, so you assume it's not there.... but it is.


CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
Withakay
Invisible
Join date: Jan 2008
26 IQ
#33
Quote by axemanchris
I'm going to take a bit of an issue with the Madonna example. She was around before anyone even dreamed that a computer could correct pitch difficulties. She *can* sing.
Hey Chris, yes I know. Actually I've been around that long too. :-) I didn't write she uses auto-tune though. I just pointed out that she is deceiving us too by pretending to sing live nowadays.
Now, I wouldn't find it surprising, in spite of that, to find out that she lip syncs her shows. (...) People know she isn't singing, but they're okay with that. So, if everyone is okay with that, then why not?
But people don't know that. After the last show in my country there was a bit of an outrage when they found out. People felt let-down.
And really... If I was a Madonna fan, I would rather see her perform her show perfectly and give me what I want and lip sync the show than have her come out and sound all winded for the last half of the show, as a result of the dancing that she does.
Some artist can. I bet P!nk doesn't lip-synch and she is in the same market (for lack of a better term). And if I want to see people dance, I go see a dance show.

I went to see Muse a few weeks ago, and let me tell you up front: I like them a lot. But I was seriously disappointed to clearly hear a synth in some songs while there were only the three band members on stage.
Quote by JackFlash19
Good for you. Do want a cookie? (...) Your ignorance is a waste of my time.
Come on, man. Your arguments are fine but no need to antagonize.
95% of producers, engineers, labels, and bands DO use autotune before they finish putting out their cd. It is almost an industry standard that autotune is applied to tracks before they are mastered.
If the number is that high, why are one third of the songs I hear on the radio out-of-tune? Why can't we just have good musicians with decent skills who do not need fixing their voices? Why has the industry lowered its standards to the level that we need fixing and cheating at every turn of the road?
Granted, yes our goal is to sound as perfect on stage as we do on compact disc, but to sell cds and make them the most appealing to all audiences (mainly those with the ears of perfect pitch) you have to use software to correct MISTAKES. Because that is what they are. Pitch mistakes.
In my opinion, if they can't put out a few perfect four-five second takes over a whole day recording, then they are not good, and they don't deserve the praise. And no way a singer who can't keep in pitch for a whole song is ever going to be a good live performer.
Withakay
Invisible
Join date: Jan 2008
26 IQ
#34
Quote by axemanchris
The major labels want perfectly tuned vocals, and they will impose it if they want it. They are the sort of entity that will even add it after the fact, even if the band doesn't want it. The band can pat themselves on the back for not using it, the label gets a perfect product, and the producer quietly cashes his paycheque and keeps his mouth shut, because his reputation is his future business.
I'm almost afraid to ask, Chris, but do you? As a producer? And as a singer?
When autotune (or Melodyne, which is even better) is used for *minor* pitch correction, and used judiciously, I would defy *anyone* to pick it out.
I don't doubt that. I actually think it's incredible technology. But just like the atom bomb, I think it shouldn't be used.

I also agree that the tone of this thread is turning sour. People, this is not The Pit. Please respect each other's opinions.
Black Star
UG Fanatic
Join date: Dec 2005
376 IQ
#35
Quote by JackFlash19
..........ACTUALLY it is not 'painfully obvious' when someone is using autotune. Go ahead and pat yourself on the back a little harder because of your perfect ear to hear not only the millisecond pitch shifts it executes, but that you can tell the difference which songs use autotune and which ones don't......


.....No go ahead, keep patting.....I'll wait till you are done.............


95% of producers, engineers, labels, and bands DO use autotune before they finish putting out their cd. It is almost an industry standard that autotune is applied to tracks before they are mastered. I don't understand why people are happy with flat notes and the inability to hit pitches. Does it make the song that much more enjoyable for you to know that the song is totally raw and sounds like sht? Get off your high horse. More than likely, if a vocalist is out of tune in a recorded song, it is NOT because they are trying to be natural, it's because autotune could not effectively correct the pitch without the noticeable pitch shift sounds. They just actually suck that bad.



If the singing is flat and the singer can't sing, they shouldn't be singing anyways. It really isn't that hard to tell if a person is using autotune, though it does get harder to tell the closer the singer is to the right pitch, since there is not as noticeable of a jump. I also want to point out that autotune can sometimes mess around with a person's vibrato, which can be a glaring sign. Singing correctly, you always have some vibrato, except for a very small percentage of people. If it's not there on a recording, something's amiss.

I would say 95% of mainstream producers, engineers, labels, and bands uses autotune. It's a far stretch to say 95% of all bands. It would come as a true shock to me if even half of all metal bands, indie bands, and/or blues artists used it.

I'm interested, though. Why is it you think the music all of us listen to has flat singers who can't sing the right pitches? Of course I'm not happy with singers like that, that's why I don't listen to them. But I don't like the sound of excessive autotune, either.

Now, I do want to clarify something. I'm perfectly alright with autotune being used as a failsafe. As long as it's not used as a crutch. Also, as said, *minor* corrections are also alright, as long as it doesn't go overboard.
My guitar modification blog.
Quote by MuffinMan
Jesus was all like "To those about to rock, I salute you." then he grabbed his mighty axe and rocked the Romans out really hard. Of course they were strict classical music so....
Last edited by Black Star at Jan 9, 2010,
Zycho
Registered User
Join date: Nov 2007
300 IQ
#36
I don't think people realize that pretty much any record that's produced these days has auto-tune on the vocals. A very minor amount, but auto-tune none the less.
isaac_bandits
𝄢
Join date: Apr 2007
194 IQ
#37
Quote by Lams
so when you record something, you're recording it for those people with perfect pitch? no wonder you're on an internet forum and not on tour rocking out, if you main target is "mainly those with the ears of perfect pitch".


If you make a record that has perfectly in tune vocals, people with perfect pitch will like it (subjectiveness aside) and people with relative pitch will like it too, as it results in all of the intervals being in tune, and people who have bad senses of pitch wouldn't like it any less than out of tune vocals. They just wouldn't notice.

If you set a standard for the pickiest listeners, the less picky ones will like it too.

Quote by Lams
Also i guess you're not a fan of the lo-fi genre? and live takes? do you know that some bands, besides those on mtv and i guess, radio, actually record stuff without overdubs and digital stuff? i'm not saying it sounds better, but it's not a rule to use all the technology possible to sound good. the white stripes have made it to most of the "best of the decade" lists and they don't use auto tune. it's note a rule.


I would assume most of us don't like music with bad production. I know I would rather hear the same song that's produced well, than one that's sloppy, and/or out of tune and/or has bad tone. And live takes can have auto-tune on them...

Quote by Lams
and i second the justification of that 95% number, and it's on a bitchy-I-think-you're-lying way. it seems that all the music you're considering is those bands who are on the big labels, but there's world outside that


How would you know that bands don't use it? You can't hear it if you have the settings right, and are singing close to in tune.

Quote by Withakay

I went to see Muse a few weeks ago, and let me tell you up front: I like them a lot. But I was seriously disappointed to clearly hear a synth in some songs while there were only the three band members on stage.


What would you rather have: a recording of the synth part? A person backstage playing the synth part? Some guy that's not part of the band playing it? The song missing the synth part?

I know that I used to feel it was "cheating" to have the synth part just going on with no-one on stage playing it, and as most bands don't want to have a synth player on stage with them, I would've rather heard the song without it. Now, I've decided that I'd rather hear a good final product.

I have no doubts that most of the guys in most bands would be able to play the synth parts for their songs if not playing their normal instruments. Afterall, they are professional musicians, and most synth parts are quite simple.

Quote by Withakay
Why can't we just have good musicians with decent skills who do not need fixing their voices? Why has the industry lowered its standards to the level that we need fixing and cheating at every turn of the road?
In my opinion, if they can't put out a few perfect four-five second takes over a whole day recording, then they are not good, and they don't deserve the praise. And no way a singer who can't keep in pitch for a whole song is ever going to be a good live performer.


Well what are you standards for in tune?

Try this: Get your guitar and a tuner (the kind with a mic, not just the line in). Make sure your guitar is tuned and play a note that is comfortable for your range. Then sing that note as you heard it. Does your tuner say your perfectly in tune? I know most tuners with most voices will have the person's voice a couple cents sharp or flat. You could play that song and sing it, and it would sound fine to most people (since a difference of a couple cents isn't even noticeable), but the autotune will just make it exactly right. They are good musicians.

Quote by Withakay

I don't doubt that. I actually think it's incredible technology. But just like the atom bomb, I think it shouldn't be used.


Why shouldn't it be used? Does it make music "too easy"? Its not really any different than the drummer playing to a click track to stay in time. You could argue that drummers should have a perfect sense of timing, rather than relying on a metronome, so that they aren't 2 bpm fast at the end of a song (a similar error margin to what auto-tune is usually correcting).

Quote by Black Star
If the singing is flat and the singer can't sing, they shouldn't be singing anyways. It really isn't that hard to tell if a person is using autotune, though it does get harder to tell the closer the singer is to the right pitch, since there is not as noticeable of a jump. I also want to point out that autotune can sometimes mess around with a person's vibrato, which can be a glaring sign. Singing correctly, you always have some vibrato, except for a very small percentage of people. If it's not there on a recording, something's amiss.


Have you ever used auto-tune?

I've played around with it, and you really can't tell if your just singing steady pitches. When you start doing glissandos, and it jumps by semitones rather then being smooth its obvious, but if you sing flat/sharp on purpose (by like 10-20 cents) then it just bumps it up, and the tone sounds fine (if you have it set up right). You can also set up autotune to auto-vibrato someone's voice after the pitch has been corrected.
dullsilver_mike
UG's Hotdog
Join date: Jun 2007
741 IQ
#38
Quote by JackFlash19
Nearly EVERY producer/engineer uses autotune or some form of it to strengthen the musical quality of the records they produce. If you want a quality sounding album, use it. Even if the vocalist doesn't necessarily need it, use it to clean up the microscopic parts he deviated pitch on.


Now that's an exaggeration. I've heard at least as much if not more complaining about using autotune subtly than I have about using it as a specific musical effect. A big portion singers get up their own butt over the issue and how " a real singer shouldn't need it" a lot of producers feel that even subtly used it sucks some of the "organic" sound of a recording--and it is still noticeable to careful ears.

I'm not saying I have a problem with it personally, but I think at least half of the whining isn't even over autotune as an effect in pop music, it's as a crutch that can be detrimental to accurately representing the human voice and the technical skill of singers.
axemanchris
Awwww.... NOW what?!
Join date: Aug 2006
2,471 IQ
#39
^Actually, as a singer and as a producer, I don't use it. Here's why:

1. It's expensive.
2. I have found, over the years, that often times (most times), it is faster to re-sing the part than it is to edit the crap out of it.
3. As a musician, and as a producer, I draw the line between well-produced and over-produced at that point where you can no longer do live what you can in the studio. If I can't sing it or play it live, I don't want to record it.
4. As much as I like to be as perfect as I can be, I can't justify the expense, given items #2 and #3.

... though I have found that it would be nice to have for some clients I have recorded....

CT
Could I get some more talent in the monitors, please?

I know it sounds crazy, but try to learn to inhale your voice. www.thebelcantotechnique.com

Chris is the king of relating music things to other objects in real life.
dougl126
Jesus rules!
Join date: Sep 2007
866 IQ
#40
okay, but dont be surprised when you get done with a live gig and the "fans" complain because you dont sound as good as on your record...