Quote:
posted by blackcatdigi:
I see your point, Curve. The deeper question is why does a singer (who can't sing) have any fans, to begin with? |
I highly doubt that in any case the singer "can't sing." I honestly believe there is not such a thing. Anybody who likes to sing, and does, can sing, and should. How well they do it is purely subjective.
Any singer who has enough fans to be a concert draw has obviously connected with an audience on some level. It could be their lyrical content, or the emotional intensity with which they perform a song, or the originality with which they interpret a lyric. It could be the way they use their looks and their physique to communicate a dramatic action, for which music happens to be the medium. It could be some combination of any or all of the above.
A singer who lacks any of those attributes, yet possesses perfect pitch, may satisfy the asthetic criteria of someone who "hates Autotune." But isn't that a recipé for a dreadfully boring artist?
Anyway, I see way too much emphasis being placed on Autotune on this thread. From what I read of Dave LeBolt's comments, there is a much bigger picture than Auto-tuning "pitchy" vocalists involved here. He specifically mentioned the analog mixing board and it's continued preponderence in the live arena. I see Dave's comments pointing towards some of the automation of mixing, sends, and plugins that we enjoy in the Pro Tools studio environment being somehow integrated into the live FOH engineering environment. And THAT's some seriously cool possibilities, Autotune-abuse of the vocalists notwithstanding.
I have family members who tour globally with major acts, and it's amazed me that none of them use digital consoles live for FOH. I can understand how every venue is different, and so requires individual attention in achieving balanced acoustics. But even so, recall-able templates for certain types of venues could at least make setup faster for a FOH mixer, from which he or she could make adjustments at soundcheck. I think what would be key for Digi is to write software that would let those incremental changes simultaneously adjust the existing mix automation proportionately.
Then, there is the plugins. I think if a guitarist wants the plugins used on the recording to be triggered live on the console, rather than hitting stompboxes on stage, that doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Or some dope-sounding stereo flange effect on the drums that was done in the studio - if that could be recreated on a digital FOH console with the same plugin used in the studio. The possibilities are endless, once you start thinking about it that way. Just as Pro Tools enabled a whole new creative aspect to producing recordings, the same approach could lend a new creative aspect to mixing live sound.
As far as Auto-tuning vocalists in the live arena, that's already being done, in the racks of outboard gear, along with harmonisers, compressors, and the rest of the stuff we're used to using to treat live vocal tracks with, not to mention the canned backing tracks. This is nothing new.
Integrating it all into a digital FOH console, on the other hand, WOULD be new. And if it would make high-quality live performances cheaper and easier to produce, it would be a cool thing.