Auto-Tune, is it abused?

[Mr. Shadow]

Okay... I didn't read up enough on this. So, it's being used to modify "live" music. If it's modified it's no longer live. It rates ZERO with me.

 

[Magic]

Not knowing what auto-tune was, I was shocked to learn that a couple of my favorite pop artists absolutely abuse this....Uncle Kracker and Rascal Flatts.

Now that I know what auto-tune is and I actually listen for the voice "warbles", it is shocking at how many artists use this. Uncle Kracker hides his use of auto-tune but it is there if you listen carefully.

Cher, would be an exception. She is a fantastic singer, and used auto-tune to completely alter her voice for the effect, very much like Peter Frampton used the voice box.


Honestly, I dont mind some mild corrections, as in Uncle Kracker, but to base your whole music career on a piece of software does seem like dishonesty in disguise. I think this is why a lot of people have little respect for pop music, all the gimmicks and tricks are fabricated, there is no talent behind it.

 

[LG]

When I saw ZZ Top on the Deguello tour, they played "Manic Mechanic", having worn my vinyl record out and knew all the songs by heart, I Knew they were using tape effects to reproduce the sound effects, especially Dusty's spoken vocals, there was no way they could do that live and reproduce the effect, so I didn't mind that at all. Only the necessary bits were used, Billy, Dusty and Frank played the majority of the song just like any other. That I find acceptable, and there was no "Chicanery" involved, we all knew what was going on and it made the song as close to the original as possible.

I have lost respect for most modern Pop artists a long time ago, not just because of the "fake" parts, but the music just is so...plastic sounding to me.

 

[Magic]

Pop music with all the fake sounds and sampled beats is "plastic".

LG, it is like fake boobs, once you realize they are fake, you loose appreciation for them.

 

[LG]

Fake Boobs....

The last time I saw Jethro Tull, was a couple of years after the amazing digital technology had started to filter into the concert tour business. He took a couple of moments to pay tribute to the stack of electronic boxes off to one side of the stage, and explained that after all the decades of playing live, that the "DSP" finally allowed them to deliver the best possible live shows in the bands history. They could get the exact specs to suit the arena, and as a result we got the 100% best Tull could offer. That is another acceptable part of live shows, it doesn't replace talent, but helps the band to sound their very best.

Okay now on to Botox...

 

[Magic]

you know I am not against acoustical enhancements for concerts. Some arena's just aren't made for the optimal concert experience. But I would be totally pissed off if I found out that that the vocals I was hearing was coming from a software set up behind the stage.


Botox....

 

[Soot and Stars]

I'm in the position that music is art and whatever means it takes to get the artist with the actual vision for the music to get it there is alright with me. The greatest albums in the world could come from someone who can't sing worth beans and to me I'd rather see them take out a tool than have someone else not connected to the writing of the work sing it. As far as what they do live I hope that people know their artist well enough before hand to know what they are paying for. On the other hand I also want my artist to be honest about their tools. I never knew Uncle Kracker used auto tune but I knew about Kanye's use because it was purposely used for his album 808's and Heartbreak and it made for the best hip-hop soul album of the last decade IMO. It just worked within the context of what he was doing. In concert I want what I originally enjoyed from the album so no auto tune for those particular songs wouldn't bother me either!

 

[MusicMistress]

If you actually like rap and hip hop, then no it isn't abused. As a fan of the oposite spectrum of mucic, I say it is not only abused but should be added as a warning label "caution, this music is fabricated"

 

[AboutAGirl]

Now hey, I listen to rap and autotune has no place in any of the rap I like. The more organic, the better.

As far as concerts go, there's a lot more going on there than we readily admit. A lot of sound effects and vocal effects and all sorts of things beyond or other than auto-tune. A lot of the older guys we go see have an audio vocal track to help them out. Roger Waters for one! Me, I think live shows should be completely live and completely raw. For example I think Pink Floyd should forego the sound effects at a live gig, let the music speak for itself. For example I have a recording where for the intro to money they were actually throwing some change around or something. Sounded completely different but it was really cool. Then again I think everybody should be raw and live on their studio records too, so what do I know?

But S&S brings to mind a staggeringly romantic concept... imagine some poor little twerp, with no technical talent to speak of, mired in poverty, but with a brilliant mind and a knack for composing genuine pop masterpices. Imagine this person composes these amazing songs all on his own and then uses a bootlegged copy of pro-tools to turn his scraggily voice listenable and his songs launch to the top of the charts! Beautiful... too bad this is not the end to which auto-tune is commonly employed. Also there's the fact that I'd much, much rather here his scraggily voice than some computerized piece o' crud.

 

[METALPRIEST]

I agree that some things need to be raw. Like Floyd singing everything without assistance but I disagree on the sound effects. That's part of the Floyd experience live or on record.