Author Topic: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?  (Read 8262 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19342
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #50 on: March 17, 2018, 02:32:41 pm »
It's really quite simple -- when talent is relegated to being the nameless faceless folks that work in the background to make the music, color by number style, while lesser talents with a hook garner all the attention and the lions sharer of the money the consequence is a devaluation of talent and ultimately ... music itself.  In the end music suffers and music is important -- too important to let this continue.  Arguing that the way things are is somehow OK because, reasons, is pathetic!
You would need to fo back to the 19th century to see anything fundamentally different. As soon as electronics became involved, the bulk of the talented started to be relegated to working behind the scenes. By the 60s MoTown was the biggest thing, based on the audience only seeing the singers. Most people had no idea who the writers, arrangers, musicians or producers were. A small number of people, like Quincy Jones, became famous for their work behind the scenes, but they were rare. Then we started to find many of the singer only bands were not the actual people who performed on the recording. At least auto-tune means we hear the actual named performers, however heavily processed.

All the typical audience really cares about is the final show they are presented with. That's not the case with a hardened classical, jazz or rock audience, but they aren't the bulk of the market. Its still hard to achieve a long successful career without genuine talent, whatever kind of music you are involved in, so maybe it all works out fairly in the end.
I see lots of this. Many people comment on how good old Motown tracks were, whilst deriding contemporary R&B as being overly processed and soulless, yet the traditional jazz, swing and blues musicians at the time, felt the that way about about Motown: too poppy, very polished and soulless!

Oh yeah... let's not get started on those deadass hip hop gangsta rappaz with dropped pants (full nappy)  Yo Yos   |O    Disgusting creatures, end of story   :-- 
They need AutoDumpster not AutoTune  ::)
Either you've only heard a small subsection of hip-hop music, or you're very narrow minded. Not all hip-hop is about gangs, drugs, violence and abusive sexual behaviour. Lots of it is about life in general, love and relationships, much like any other type of music. I can think of plenty of hip-hop tracks, which are profanity free and would happily let my 5 year old nephew listen to.

Don't get me started on punk. Most of it is rubbish. They can't play the guitar properly, only three chords, they shout, rather than sing and there's plenty of nastiness and profanity too. At least rapping requires some level of talent!
 

Offline alexanderbrevig

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 700
  • Country: no
  • Musician, developer and EE hobbyist
    • alexanderbrevig.com
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #51 on: March 17, 2018, 04:42:29 pm »
Auto-tune is the name of the first commercial program for pitch correction. It is now understood in the profession to be an effect made known by Cher and kids probably know it because of T-pain.

Pitch correction is the catch all for other uses of pitch manipulation and formant shifts.
Be it slightly pulling a tone up a few cents, adding or removing vibrato or even making a nasal voice sound softer.

Stop calling polishing auto-tune. Pitch correction is used everywhere by everyone. That's just how the industry and our audience works.
 

Offline Electro Detective

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2715
  • Country: au
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #52 on: March 17, 2018, 10:29:41 pm »
Sorry mate, there were pitch shifters, harmonisers, vocorders, delay lines etc etc in use 20 years that could do that before Cher did the 'oink oink' thing as an effect
that singtards everywhere today now use to CHEAT their way to fame, fortune
...and insulting our ears and intelligence  ::)

And I know that Cher can hold a tune  :-+  and I got no issue with the lady tossing in a bit of color on one of the tracks

Shirley Bassey did some way out stuff back then too, that lady can definitely sing, and doesn't even need a microphone in a power outage  :clap:
much less some dial up cheater toy! 
« Last Edit: March 17, 2018, 10:41:54 pm by Electro Detective »
 

Online Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19342
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #53 on: March 17, 2018, 10:44:02 pm »
Sorry mate, there were pitch shifters, harmonisers, vocorders, delay lines etc etc in use 20 years before Cher did the 'oink oink' thing as an effect
that singtards everywhere today now use to CHEAT their way to fame, fortune
and insulting our ears and intelligence  ::)

And I know that Cher can hold a tune  :-+  and I got no issue with the lady tossing in a bit of color on one of the tracks

Shirley Bassey did some way out stuff back then too, that lady can definitely sing, and doesn't even need a microphone in a power outage  :clap:
much less some dial up cheater toy!
No, it's not cheating, because everyone knows they're using tone correction software.

Now you may not like it. You're entitled to your opinion and no one's trying to change that, but don't go round accusing people of cheating, when they're not!

I've been listening to some classic R&B from the 60s to 90s whist reading this thread: Diana Ross, The Temptations, The Commodores, Alexander O'Neal, Tina Moore, Mark Morrison: all good stuff, but I might put some rock on now.
 

Offline Cyberdragon

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2676
  • Country: us
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #54 on: March 18, 2018, 02:16:15 am »
Twelve year old girls listening to a lot of this stuff probably don't even know what auto-tune even is (or they think it's just to make funny effects).

They go and think "Anyone like me can make music! Yay, I've got talent!"

Then when they grow up and go to audition, the studio basically goes "We have another one...deploy the 'corrector'"... >:D (Not that bluntly of course, but they find out the real truth that talent is not good enough.)

Whatever happened to "vocal training"? ::)
*BZZZZZZAAAAAP*
Voltamort strikes again!
Explodingus - someone who frequently causes accidental explosions
 
The following users thanked this post: alexanderbrevig

Offline raptor1956

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 868
  • Country: us
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #55 on: March 18, 2018, 02:50:47 am »
It's really quite simple -- when talent is relegated to being the nameless faceless folks that work in the background to make the music, color by number style, while lesser talents with a hook garner all the attention and the lions sharer of the money the consequence is a devaluation of talent and ultimately ... music itself.  In the end music suffers and music is important -- too important to let this continue.  Arguing that the way things are is somehow OK because, reasons, is pathetic!
You would need to fo back to the 19th century to see anything fundamentally different. As soon as electronics became involved, the bulk of the talented started to be relegated to working behind the scenes. By the 60s MoTown was the biggest thing, based on the audience only seeing the singers. Most people had no idea who the writers, arrangers, musicians or producers were. A small number of people, like Quincy Jones, became famous for their work behind the scenes, but they were rare. Then we started to find many of the singer only bands were not the actual people who performed on the recording. At least auto-tune means we hear the actual named performers, however heavily processed.

All the typical audience really cares about is the final show they are presented with. That's not the case with a hardened classical, jazz or rock audience, but they aren't the bulk of the market. Its still hard to achieve a long successful career without genuine talent, whatever kind of music you are involved in, so maybe it all works out fairly in the end.

I don't completely disagree with you but I would argue that the tech of today gives far more opportunity to alter things than 50 years ago and that the tools of old were more to color or expand the voice and not partially synthesize it.  We are reaching a point where we could replace people altogether and instead have REALLY anthropomorphic robots that look like models and sound perfect.  Throw in some AI and you can do away with composers and musicians while where at it.


Brian
 

Offline ruairi

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 302
  • Country: us
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #56 on: March 18, 2018, 04:12:13 am »
You guys are hilarious.

Let's talk about the epidemic of shortcuts, helping hands, copied code, auto cal routines, online calculators, simulation software etc that modern engineers (all of us here) are using on a daily basis.  A real engineer is using a slide-rule and doing everything by hand…..right?

A great engineer will use modern tools to create something useful and hopefully profitable, a bad engineer with all of these modern tools will still be a bad engineer.

If finishing a recording is the definition of success then yes people use pitch correction to cheat, if actually moving people emotionally with your music is the definition of success then it requires talent and hard work, one way or another.
 

Offline Electro Detective

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2715
  • Country: au
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #57 on: March 18, 2018, 09:59:33 am »
Ok, let's try it this way  ::)

The activity of recruiting untalented, can't sing wannabees using Autotune to go beyond basic correction and enhancement, can only be classed as CHEATING 

It's also robbing taking away work and exposure prospects from genuine vocalists and musicians

The consumer is being cheated in this regard also, having to tolerate Autotard noise sprayed everywhere and missing out on the genuine article


Come on guys, this isn't using electric tools to make furniture faster and CADputers for electronics to save time and R+D grief,

these are mediocre come no talent unscrupulous money grubbing scum, straight out cheating everyone!


Please see it for what it is, instead of making excuses because unaware of how it works,
believing this cheating crap is the only game in town because that's all you've been exposed to,
which plays a big part in how these cheats get to be eventually accepted by the connedsumer   

 

Online Zero999

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 19342
  • Country: gb
  • 0999
Re: You consider auto-tune cheating? How wide spread do you think?
« Reply #58 on: March 18, 2018, 10:39:50 am »
Ok, let's try it this way  ::)

The activity of recruiting untalented, can't sing wannabees using Autotune to go beyond basic correction and enhancement, can only be classed as CHEATING 
Cheating involves an element of deception, which isn't present, because everyone knows about it.

Quote
It's also robbing taking away work and exposure prospects from genuine vocalists and musicians
Like CAD software robbed skilled draughtsman of their jobs.

Quote
The consumer is being cheated in this regard also, having to tolerate Autotard noise sprayed everywhere and missing out on the genuine article
So, what if the consumer prefers it? You may not like it, but if the majority do and it sells. Don't like it? Don't listen to it.

Quote
Come on guys, this isn't using electric tools to make furniture faster and CADputers for electronics to save time and R+D grief,

these are mediocre come no talent unscrupulous money grubbing scum, straight out cheating everyone!
I think I see your point: you see music as an artform, distinct from engineering and art should be a human skill, with soul, emotion etc. but the mass market doesn't care about that. In reality it's all about money and always has been, especially since the dawn of the record industry. Producers will simply use the tools to make their music sell as much as possible and people want the live performance to be similar to the track they heard on their phone and automatic pitch correction is the only way to do it.

Quote
Please see it for what it is, instead of making excuses because unaware of how it works,
believing this cheating crap is the only game in town because that's all you've been exposed to,
which plays a big part in how these cheats get to be eventually accepted by the connedsumer   
No doubt there are plenty of people who are ignorant, but the information is freely available. My guess is some people don't want to know. They're happy to look up to the cult of celebrity. Hell there are plenty of famous people and social media stars who don't try sing, act or make jokes.
 
The following users thanked this post: Electro Detective


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf