Celemony Melodyne 5

[wst3]

kids today...

[Guy Rowland]

To be fair, I don't think its universal among the yoof by any means. Autotune's a subject where things easily get conflated. I think the specific uniform sound that we're talking about is fairly genre-specific. Even in pop its not ubiquitous, stuff like Katy Perry or Taylor swift is just fine. It's that whole RnB thing where it gets old very quickly to us, but its so identifiable with the genre I guess its just part of the expected sound that the fans like. Pah.

[Ashermusic]

To be fair, I don't think its universal among the yoof by any means. Autotune's a subject where things easily get conflated. I think the specific uniform sound that we're talking about is fairly genre-specific. Even in pop its not ubiquitous, stuff like Katy Perry or Taylor swift is just fine. It's that whole RnB thing where it gets old very quickly to us, but its so identifiable with the genre I guess its just part of the expected sound that the fans like. Pah.

That may be what you are talking about, it wasn't what I was talking about

Katy Perry and Taylor Swift are routinely tuned and while more subtle, it does affect the sound. Adele however bucks the trend.

Here is a good overview:
https://pitchfork.com/features/article/ ... lar-music/

[Lawrence]

To be fair, I don't think its universal among the yoof by any means. Autotune's a subject where things easily get conflated. I think the specific uniform sound that we're talking about is fairly genre-specific. Even in pop its not ubiquitous, stuff like Katy Perry or Taylor swift is just fine. It's that whole RnB thing where it gets old very quickly to us, but its so identifiable with the genre I guess its just part of the expected sound that the fans like. Pah.

I’ve never heard a single Katy Perry or Taylor Swift song that wasn’t micro-tuned to perfection. Can you point one out?

Maybe what you’re talking about is the telltale yodel? That may not be there, but there ain’t any iffy notes either, and live singers just aren’t absolutely perfect all of the time.I stand by it-an entire generation thinks singers sing robotically and perfectly.

[Guy Rowland]

No, it's not the yodel Larry, but I think that use on multiple takes is key. Perhaps we need a Beaufort scale of Autotune?

1 - everything set flat, or with fixed unnatural-sounding intervals (sounds like Vocaloid)
2 - everything set to 85% but used on multiple voices or takes (this is there effect where everyone tends to sound the same)
3 - Keeping natural characteristics but with perfect pitching (Katy Perry, Taylor Swift)
4 - Keeping natural characteristics, imperfect pitching but still assisted

I'm saying (4) is more or less ubiquitous today, it is as common as using reverb or compression, (3) is very common in pop, but personally it doesn't bother me, in part because singers still sound like themselves. (2) and (1) I can't abide and is more genre-specific.

[Lawrence]

Gotcha. My opinion is that your number three is totally ubiquitous, on everything from pop to electronica to alt.

In a way it’s not so different than the way we used to do things, multiple takes and cutting together a final take LITERALLY, by cutting tape and assembling it.
In the end, you want a vocal that’s in tune.

[Guy Rowland]

Its sort of an emotive subject for some people isn't it? The drive to what is perceived as authenticity, a little like the Dogme 95 movies who imposed strict rules on filmmaking to make the results more "honest". In music, I guess that would be everyone playing at the same time, no overdubs, until you get a perfect take from everyone. And then mix it with no compression etc. I get it as an intellectual exercise, but otherwise I think it has little to commend it. Few Dogme 95 movies stood any kind of artistic test - a cut to a close up is a visual effect, after all. It is about making best use of the medium you are in.

Every time we quantise we cheat. We had this conversation recently with regard to some things that Brian Eno said, how any one decision like autotuning a dodgy note will make something sound better, but once you apply that to an entire song it has become flat and boring. Like anything, I think it is always in the details and the balance. I think the entire journey should be making everything as good as it can possibly be, which isn't the same as making everything perfect and indeed can almost be the opposite in certain cases. The singer wants to give the best performance they possibly can, which will involve so many qualities that are beyond our ability to manipulate - the precise inflexions, the way certain words are expressed or pronounced, the precise anatomical singing techniques used ... so many indefinable characteristics. Sometimes it might be one performance that is literally unrepeatable.

So then in terms of production having chosen those best moments that best express the song, you then use all the tools in the box to present it in the best way - reverb, delay, distortion, saturation, compression, doubling, you name it. Tuning is just another one of those to me. Just because it is a powerful tool that is easy to overdo, doesn't mean that it is somehow unethical to use it at all.

[Lawrence]

I didn’t suggest that it was unethical or invalid. I suggested that it is ubiquitous and that it suggests, by its ubiquity, that singers can actually sing that way in a concert or sitting in a room, when no one actually can without a mic and software. Big time pop stars are too busy dancing to sing in concert, anyway.

There are, of course, great singers out there with excellent pitch, and I’ve been privileged to work with a number of them over the years. However, none of them can produce an unwavering flat line on a tuner on every note.

Personally, I prefer to do multiple takes and small pitch corrections, but that’s generational and in my comfort zone. With my own singer/songwriter tunes, I rarely even do more than two takes. I’m more interested in the song itself and the emotion in it than I am in perfection.
.

[Guy Rowland]

(re my last post - sorry Larry didn't mean to suggest I thought you were thinking any of this - it was a general response to the whole conversation, was pretty much agreeing with your previous post!)

[wst3]

embarrassed to admit that the only time I listen to Katy Perry or Taylor Swift is when my kids are playing their music. That is not a commentary on either artist, I like them both (and in fact Taylor grew up not far from me, I heard her sing when she was very young, and she had a voice, and a presence that were just amazing for a kid - for anyone really.)

And I won't argue the artistic value of using tools to perfect the intonation. Assuming it is an artistic choice, well, hoping it is.

The downside is exactly what Larry is describing, there are people out there that expect perfect intonation in every performance. Fortunately for my kids, neither of their parents can sing like that<G>! When you get right down to it I can't play my guitar with perfect intonation, I can get very close in a specific key, but there are physical limits.

For my own productions? I won't use a tuning aid except on very rare occasions, for example a performance that is so good, that suffers from one or two really bad notes, and I am unable to get another take. Which happens infrequently.

I will use Autotune and Melodyne as effects, and that can be a lot of fun. I'm also trying to get the hang of using Melodyne to create the tempo map, which (since I do not yet use Logic) would be awesome!

But I find the whole perfect intonation thing to be distracting. Maybe just because I am old?

[Lawrence]

(re my last post - sorry Larry didn't mean to suggest I thought you were thinking any of this - it was a general response to the whole conversation, was pretty much agreeing with your previous post!)

Yeah, I was so upset I PM’d you for advice on another matter