#1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_YdRT2jGFw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkjrdvFsxKE&

They should get on to those Sabbath records! I mean, for all those people who say that new studio methods have ruined music: you've got the multi-tracks, man. You've got the protools. Put up or shut up. They need to complete this by using beat detective and "brickwalling" those recordings. It would just make them better. They especially need to auto tune Ozzy, and those old Metallica records.

All jokes aside, what do you guys think?:

I feel like it sucks the life out of the song. It sounds like a computer instead of a human. I think the non auto-tuned is better. I am biased because I was always kind of against auto-tune, but people have said that you can't hear a difference and I've felt that that might be true. On Smells you can tell Kurt could already sing certain parts very well and in many parts it doesn't matter. But on Sappy, the computer takes over. I'm not trying to do the " this new artists sucks" or " new music sucks", but it really makes me wonder what great vocalists of this generation have had their distinctions cropped by the computer.

By the way, I'm not just referring to the vibrato thing that occurs in autotune, Kurt sounds like his voice is being sampled in the first one, like someone's pressing and holding down kurt cobain voice keys on a keyboard, as opposed to an actual human singing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFABchWJ-k&
That one's more of a gag.

inb4 not another auto tune thread. it's been talked about, but there hasn't been an example of an old song autotuned in a pragmatic way
#2
Oh noez!

Well at least hardcore Nirvana fans will have the old records to listen to, but new incoming fans?
#5
Quote by TonyHeard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_YdRT2jGFw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkjrdvFsxKE&

They should get on to those Sabbath records! I mean, for all those people who say that new studio methods have ruined music: you've got the multi-tracks, man. You've got the protools. Put up or shut up. They need to complete this by using beat detective and "brickwalling" those recordings. It would just make them better. They especially need to auto tune Ozzy, and those old Metallica records.

All jokes aside, what do you guys think?:

I feel like it sucks the life out of the song. It sounds like a computer instead of a human. I think the non auto-tuned is better. I am biased because I was always kind of against auto-tune, but people have said that you can't hear a difference and I've felt that that might be true. On Smells you can tell Kurt could already sing certain parts very well and in many parts it doesn't matter. But on Sappy, the computer takes over. I'm not trying to do the " this new artists sucks" or " new music sucks", but it really makes me wonder what great vocalists of this generation have had their distinctions cropped by the computer.

By the way, I'm not just referring to the vibrato thing that occurs in autotune, Kurt sounds like his voice is being sampled in the first one, like someone's pressing and holding down kurt cobain voice keys on a keyboard, as opposed to an actual human singing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmFABchWJ-k&
That one's more of a gag.

inb4 not another auto tune thread. it's been talked about, but there hasn't been an example of an old song autotuned in a pragmatic way

To be fair, this is really shitty auto-tuning.
Quote by dudetheman
So what? I wasted like 5 minutes watching DaddyTwoFoot's avatar.


Metalheads are the worst thing that ever happened to metal.
#7
no me gusta
Quote by Strato-Massacre
yeah you shouldnt have told the pit to rape your mom.

Quote by Kensai
It's not sexist, girls are just too stupid and weak to hold up doors and stuff for themselves.
#8
Auto-Tune can be a helpful tool if you're concerned with getting all the pitches exact. I'm not necessarily concerned with that, because those slight mistunings are what make people sound like people. Even the greatest singers don't sing in perfect tune.

It can be a cool effect when abused, though, even though it's been overused to the point of cliché.
#9
What The Fvck Is This Shit?
Quote by beadhangingOne
What happened to Snake?

Snake?

Snake?

SNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE?!


Quote by TunerAddict
you can take my mouse and keyboard from my cold, slightly orange from cheetos, dead fingers


Quote by Baby Joel
Isis is amazing
#11
Quote by TonyHeard
Just fan made, this is not going to happen on an actual record.


Oh okay. It would suck if it was record-company controlled and they actually did it, Nirvana was all about the grittiness n stuff.
#12
Quote by WizMystery
Oh okay. It would suck if it was record-company controlled and they actually did it, Nirvana was all about the grittiness n stuff.


Lol, I don't think a big company would release such a shitty and poorly made auto-tuned song man...

There's

NEVER

enough

GAIN


#13
They did Dylan too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLnci-65qrs&

but they made it better, guys

And guys saying " that auto tune is shitty", even engineers that use it have admitted that side effect of autotune ( making vocals less human ), and have felt displeasure in how now people are coming in to studios singing robotic like they are already autotuned. Not like T-Pain autotune, but like regular autotune. Because they haven't heard different.
Last edited by TonyHeard at Sep 20, 2010,