#2
"Vocal tuning in this day and age has become a necessary part of making your vocal track sound as professional as possible".

I think you meant 'canned' rather than 'professional'. Sorry man but posting something like that warrants some heat
You Dont Know Me

I have 10 Anarchy Points - I also have 8 Mythology points!

Peavey Generation EXP Custom White
Yamaha 120S Black
Korg AX5G
Digitech Whammy
Zvex Fuzz Factory
Boss OS2

Quote by mrfinkle213
This man has brains.

Quote by CoreysMonster
Banned for indirect reference.
#3
Not familiar with professional quality vocals.... but...

Shouldn't whatever is coming from the singer's mouth be, more or less, pitch-perfect?

I know there may a be a tiny little modulation here and there... but I think "professional vocals" start and end with the singer.

The little "clean up" is done by the producer.

This is an example of a pitch-perfect musician. He sits down, he does 1 song, then leaves. No edits or modulation...

Elliott Smith

This is a teenage Jackson C. Frank singing into a clunky tape recorder during the late 1950s. This is what Real Musicians sound like...

Teenage Jackson C. Frank...

Jackson C. Frank

If you can't do something like this in 1 or 2 takes.... into an analog tape with absolutely no edits, corrections, engineering, mastering, or modulation of any kind...

... you are not a real musician.

Jackson C. Frank was merely singing into a tape recorder. This was before the Internet, before color TV became popular, before jet travel was common... before computers, before... just about everything you see in front of you today existed.

This is Jackson C. Frank from the late 1990s. The voice is shot and busted but.... the soul can still sing...

Old Jackson C. Frank
Last edited by Lateralus32 at May 26, 2016,
#4
I agree for the most part, but 'not a real musician' however is too harsh. You're just not going to get people getting in one take on tape these days, I mean sure you might get some, but the mindset is totally different in the modern age. We're in the age of do-overs rather than do it once and that's it.

Vocals can be notoriously difficult to get in one take too, I'm fine with vocal lines being recorded as just lines rather than full takes, but modding vocal pitches etc... Fucking sing it right and take singing lessons.

It's no different from a guitarist going into the studio and not tuning his guitar or being able to play the piece they're recording. Fucking learn it, take lessons if you have to, study what you're about to record, know it inside it out, and do it right.

None of this auto-tune correction bullshit. Professional sounding? I think the term shite applies more readily.
You Dont Know Me

I have 10 Anarchy Points - I also have 8 Mythology points!

Peavey Generation EXP Custom White
Yamaha 120S Black
Korg AX5G
Digitech Whammy
Zvex Fuzz Factory
Boss OS2

Quote by mrfinkle213
This man has brains.

Quote by CoreysMonster
Banned for indirect reference.
#5
Quote by Anthony1991
I agree for the most part, but 'not a real musician' however is too harsh. You're just not going to get people getting in one take on tape these days, I mean sure you might get some, but the mindset is totally different in the modern age. We're in the age of do-overs rather than do it once and that's it.

Vocals can be notoriously difficult to get in one take too, I'm fine with vocal lines being recorded as just lines rather than full takes, but modding vocal pitches etc... Fucking sing it right and take singing lessons.

It's no different from a guitarist going into the studio and not tuning his guitar or being able to play the piece they're recording. Fucking learn it, take lessons if you have to, study what you're about to record, know it inside it out, and do it right.

None of this auto-tune correction bullshit. Professional sounding? I think the term shite applies more readily.


Perhaps I'm being a little presumptions here- but I would wager that majority of all songs you hear, regardless of the talent level of the singer and their ability to stay in key, still use some form or level of pitch correction.

In my opinion, 'pitch correction' and 'auto-tune' are no longer the same thing. When I think 'auto-tune', I think extremely aggressive pitch correction with super fast attack and really tight pitch correction, leading to a sort of robotic sound. Its almost similar to using a limiter vs a compressor in a way, if you ask me.

I used to hate autotune, like most people claim they do; but now that I've been producing music, I see autotune simply as another really cool effect you can use to achieve a certain sound. I still think your singer needs some level of talent, or even autotune wont sound that great.

Now, pitch correction.. pitch correction I generally regard as more subtle, slower attack and looser correction. I'm a big fan of pitch correction. Because it ADDS something to the sound. It makes the vocals sound a little more washy or liquid in a really cool way that helps them sit even better and more cleanly into a mix. I notice, even with some really good singers that Ive recorded with, the second I enable pitch correction, the vocal just seems to sit exactly how I like.

So yea, if you want your recording to sound more raw or live-like (which is good sometimes, but I am a super modern and polished kind of guy) then sure, leave the pitch correction off. Your vocals will stand out a little more and not quite sit in the same pocket as the other instruments, but it will feel a bit more real. If you want super polished, clean and commercial, then use pitch correction.
Quote by suckmahnuts
Watterboy, I love you.

Quote by davrossss
You are now my favourite person on UG.....You write cool shit.

Quote by wannabestoner69


#6
I'm with Watterboy. I know how cool it is to say you did something in one or two takes.

I know how many times I've read magazine articles about albums I did where the artist claimed something like "we were all in a room, no headphones, no overdubs, first or second take", and no, that would have been an alternate universe.

Often we'd have bands come in look at a certain room in the studio and ask "hey how did so and so band all fit in here to record the way they said they did?" and the obvious answer was that, unless they had some quantum shrinkerizer device, they didn't and they couldn't.

Minimalist recording is cool, and its fun. It also won't give you the type of sound I read about so often in the tablature section of this forum.

If we were to limit things to one or two takes, most of the music we discuss on this forum wouldn't exist.

You could look at recording philosophies as two extremes along a false dichotomy. One would be where the process was the important thing, and chose a process you want to adhere to, like few mics, few tracks, few overdubs, all live, etc...Sometimes especially jazz guys do this and it turns out great! On the other end of the extreme, you could have a "whatever it takes for the song to say what it wants to say" approach. This one gives you Brittney Spears or whatever the current computer made pop song is, but it also gives you Pink Floyd. Somewhere between these two extremes is usually where people find themselves.