Audio Processing Effect
- Thread starter elfigod
- Start date
-
- Tags
- audio audioprocessing mix
Register to hide this ad
BrianLW
Cheers!
DaveVoorhis
Addicted Member
Some of you are going to yell at me, but...
...I like Auto-Tune.
I mean, as an effect, so that you can hear it. When it's used as originally intended -- to perform pitch correction -- you can't hear it. Some of your favourite vocal artists are probably using it and you don't even know it.
When it's used to artificialise vocals -- as this era's answer to the Vocoder -- then it's intentionally audible.
vwestlife
Super Member
Only when they use it sparingly, just to correct a few bad notes. But many producers are lazy and apply it to the entire vocal track, even if 95% of it doesn't need it, causing artifacts which are definitely audible if you're paying attention:
http://www.hometracked.com/2008/02/05/auto-tune-abuse-in-pop-music-10-examples/comment-page-6/
Artie
Super Member
Pio1980
AK Member
The helium voice yodeling robot thing.
DaveVoorhis
Addicted Member
You have to turn it up to get that.
Used judiciously and appropriately, it's the "ooh, he/she sings really well" thing.
DaveVoorhis
Addicted Member
It's almost certainly multiple effects, which probably includes Auto-Tune or one of its competitors. A nice thing about digital audio processing is that stacking effects doesn't multiply noise.Doesn't sound like autotune to me.Certainly there is some reverb in it.
DaveVoorhis
Addicted Member
Indeed, but in some genres -- particularly those where music is produced with heavy use of digital workstations like electronic dance music or pop -- the tuning and timing are often considerably more precise than typically can be played with live instruments. Without Auto-Tune (or equivalent) and editing, even excellent vocals can sound relatively sloppy, "pitchy" (slightly sharp or flat), or harsh. I.e., a bit too "human" for the timing & tuning standards of the genre. Auto-Tune (and editing) refine the vocals and bring them in line with the instrumentals, making the vocals sound sweeter and more precise.
In other words, used properly it makes a good singer better.
Pio1980
AK Member
I am a lifelong fan of skillful artistic studiocraft production, and also appreciate artist performers that can deliver live and unassisted. Singers that can accurately slide a note with portamento unassisted are common for jazz and other expressive forms, being able to form and cradle a note in one's voice, then move it wherever the spirit takes one is definitely a skill an accomplished singer can possess and use as an extension of expression beyond studiocraft. Unprocessed acapella unaccompanied singing needs only a suitable venue, no studiocraft, to impress. Too many examples of what's in this post, I'm sure everyone knows examples and has personal favorites.
intro6
Well-Known Member
I can always tell when I'm hearing that Auto-Tune s%#t and I'll always hate it. I have listened carefully to so many recorded voices over time that I know weren't Auto-Tuned, that I know exactly how a real human voice should sound, even taking into consideration the tremendous variety of voices out there. Yeah, I'll always instantly recognize the inherent phoniness of the Auto-Tuned "voice" because it lacks the subtle and unique nuances that decent singers have. Often, it can even be the very subtle flaws in certain spots of a song phrase that make it even more special. No, I don't want everything ironed out to somebody's idea of slick, dense "perfection", even if that's what some are going for these days. To those who might say that this is the future of music, I will always strongly disagree. There are new acts who don't buy into this either. Even if this did somehow have to be the inevitable ending for recorded vocals, I would simply reject all new vocals coming out, but I'm quite sure that won't be the case.
DaveVoorhis
Addicted Member
No, you can't; not always.
You're probably not hearing it, and just hearing the result of its use, a lot more than you think.
When you are hearing it, it's usually because it's deliberately accentuated as an effect; one of the many characteristics of music production that make pop in particular (but not limited to pop) sound in-fashion or current. Music and music style and musical sound style is as much fashion-driven as anything else, and turned-up Auto-Tune -- along with certain other effects -- is a popular ingredient of the current sound fashion recipe.
Even when it's not used as an effect, using it along with other effects to polish the sound -- but not necessarily to the point that you recognise it -- is part of current music production in general.
If you don't like it, don't worry, all fashion changes and before too long, it will sound of its time and thus dated and will inevitably be replaced with some other obvious effects (or perhaps an absence of effects; maybe "naked" sound will be "in" for a while) that you may like more.
vwestlife
Super Member
I think people may be confusing the original version of the song (including the sanitized "I Took a Plane to Ibiza" version, shown below), which uses a deliberately extreme amount of Auto-tune (or some other kind of vocoder effect) during the chorus, with the cover version posted at the start of the thread, which was (ironically) filmed in front of a microphone to make it look like we're hearing the singer's authentic, live voice, when he surely had a lot of help from Auto-tune to make every note absolutely pitch-perfect, although to not such an extent that it sounds like a yodeling robot voice (except for a little bit at 2:35 when he tries to do some vibrato but the Auto-tune squashes it totally even in pitch).
Last edited:
reydelaplaya
Super Member
I don't know . . . makes Cher sound better.
This is cool. I've never seen the video though I've heard the song probably hundreds of times, but it now makes her deliberate overuse of autotune more understandable - it goes with the theme of the video.
Similar threads
