Is Auto-Tune an "effect" now?

[KeithAdv]

I don't meant the Cher-effect use of it, which I think of more as a special effect or studio trick. Although I do still continue to hear that being used today by unimaginative producers.

I mean, just that creepy metallic sheen it produces even when you don't hear the robotic note shifts.

I couldn't get over how horrible the soundtrack of "Across the Universe" was because of it. It never occurred to me that maybe they wanted it to sound that way. But more and more lately I'm hearing it being casually thrown in, not just because of pitch correction but because they seem to like the metallic sound of it.

What do you think?

[eclectic]

I've been listening to more R&B/hip-hop lately because I never really got into the genre so it's fresh to me...

Waaaay overused but I think it's intentional... Also hear it a lot in these FOB/PATD wannabe bands. I think it's intentional there as well but not for effect, out of need.

[doorknocker]

Nothing dates audio productions more than 'effects'. Autotune today is what gated reverb used to be in the 80ies...nothing wrong with it per se but WAY overused.

I still believe that peole will tire of it at some point but then again I've always been a naive optimist.

[PDC]

I wonder if over compression will be a thing of the past like these other effects. I used to hear a bunch of Vary-Fi slow downs on alt rock guitars. Tempo muting the alt choppy guitars is overdone.

[ryst]

Originally Posted by doorknocker

Nothing dates audio productions more than 'effects'. Autotune today is what gated reverb used to be in the 80ies...nothing wrong with it per se but WAY overused.

I still believe that peole will tire of it at some point but then again I've always been a naive optimist.

I hope your right because I can't imagine this effect going past 2010.

[Sk106]

Sweden's biggest hitmakers of the 90s got our version of the grammy award, 1994 I think, and at their thank speech they said they ow half their success to Antares. And they've been doing shitloads of stuff for top chart artists, Britney and Celine at that time. That says something. Tons of singers use it live too; that classic Enrique Iglesias clip where his engineer busts him out by turning off the signalchain, is just hilarous. In my world it's used more often than not - especially in pop music, just like audio quantization and stuff.

I hate it, but I can't say I see no letting up - rather the opposite. Sometimes I get to hear I'm an old prude hick and need to evolve like everybody else, not be such dinasoure preaching the return of the 1950s or something.

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by doorknocker

Nothing dates audio productions more than 'effects'. Autotune today is what gated reverb used to be in the 80ies...nothing wrong with it per se but WAY overused.

I still believe that peole will tire of it at some point but then again I've always been a naive optimist.

I was talking to a buddy just Friday who was privy to a couple of big name pop singer over dubs. (People whose names are instantly recognizable and who are considered good singers. This was not some flavor of the week pop-rock-emo or dance club fodder.)

In both cases he mentioned, talent came in, ran through a few takes, stopped, asked the engineer if he could "fix it" and he said he could but... and they said, Great... I have stuff to do, and split. And that was it. So much for artistic integrity. In the case of these two artists, I mean. Still... one gets the sense that there is a lot of that going around.


FWIW, I do not mind being fooled. I want to be fooled.

I do not, however, want to hear the hideous sound of Autotune and associated effects when they are misused/abused -- and I'm not talking about the over the top, warbly stuff that was more common a few years ago... I mean the stuff you hear on the radio every time you turn it on. Or, in my case -- since I avoid pop radio like the plague that it is -- when I'm walking in the supermarket. You hear that eerie metallic whine of the latest pop sensation droning above you on the PA. Bring back Muzak.


PS... dated effects... gated verb is bad -- but are any of y'all old enough to remember the plague of syn drum electronic pads and all the stupid "booh, booh-booh-boooh" crap a lot of drummers were putting into stuff in the late 70s/early 80s? A lot of tracks using it have since been (more tastefully) remixed to disinclude them, for the most part, but I was listening to a Brian Eno produced album by African pop band, Edikanfo a while back and, there they were... and they were awful. Just like then. They make Roto-toms seem discreetly tasteful, by comparison.

[allencollins]

Originally Posted by theblue1

I was talking to a buddy just Friday who was privy to a couple of big name pop singer over dubs. (People whose names are instantly recognizable and who are considered good singers.

why not just name them? oh I forgot you're not a name dropper.

anyhoo, Autoune is like any effect, Compression or verb or whatever. Comps and verbs can be used as an effect or they can be used to 'fix' something. The way I see it if you instantaniously associate a sound with a particular device it is used intentionally as effect or used improperly. Autotune is much like that and the SSL Buss compressor is another.

Thousands of songs have autotune or melodoyne but you don't always notice it if it was used PROPERLY to just fix a problem. All records use compression though you don't always hear it since it was used properly. But some folks like the 'sound' of compression which I guess is ok to overuse it (i.e. geoeff emmrick or Lord Alge....). I just use it for it's intended purpose not for effect. Same with reverb. I would never use long hall on drums like mutt lange or flood a mix like radiohead or coldplay.

But If you are an engineer and like the 'sound' of Autotune YOU SHOULD QUIT. It is intended to fix an out of tune instrument not add effect or texture to an instrument.

The rule of thumb for me with autotune, compression or verb is if you can hear it there is too much.
It should be transparent.

[Sigma]

ya know an effect no longer has "wow" factor when you watch VH1 classics and a commercial comes on showing a wrinkled bewigged 80's hairband playing an autotuned to the hilt song as their "new release"

[phillysoulman]

There are a lot of very big "country" records where the autotune artifact is very evident.

YO MT..wassup dude?????

[Joe Porto]

I saw a show the other day with Lee Ann Womack. It was her sitting about a foot away from what looked like a ribbon mic (a copper colored AEA R82 looking thing), with a small band behind her. No autotune, lots of bleed, not the greatest mix. It still sounded amazing. I don't listen to country at all, but the fact that I was hearing real unadulterated music was so refreshing.

[Sigma]

Originally Posted by phillysoulman

There are a lot of very big "country" records where the autotune artifact is very evident.

YO MT..wassup dude?????

chillin.. i got a 4:30 session today.. till then?... bored..gordon was over for a BBQ yesterday evening ..slow cooked ribs, jerk chicken ..gezpatcho and zuchinnini with tyme , oil and grated cheese [all veggie plates made with stuff from my garden] ..had a few hetic weeks in the studfio... i missed kay williams funeral ..had to work

[doorknocker]

The problem as I see or rather hear it is not tuning vocals per se but the sad fact that EVERYBODY feels the need to do it because it's 'how you do it these days'. The newcomers want it to sound like however's hip at the moment and the 'oldies' do it for fear of not being 'up to date' anymore.

And the even sadder side-effect is what theblue1 one has just described above; singers that COULD sing but are not bothering to kick ass anymore.

But then again, they blame 'downloads' for waning record sales, it surely can't be their lack of commitment....

[theblue1]

Originally Posted by allencollins

why not just name them? oh I forgot you're not a name dropper.
...[snip]

I just didn't want y'all to be jealous because a guy I know from the coffeehouse knows a guy who was recording some other guys. (Well, a guy and a gal, separately.)

I mean... that right there makes me too big a celeb to be president, right?

[TonyBelmont]

In the hip hop world, they are using it as an effect on their RAP vocals.... they don't even sing!!!!

I just don't understand the fascination with it.

[MFactProd]

Personally, I never really understood the "big" debate about auto-tune, melodyne, etc. No one ever made a big deal when strobe or digital guitar tuners came out. You never heard anyone criticize someone for the 'overuse' and 'abuse' of these little gadgets.

"hey joe did you hear "so and so's" last record? The guitars are all in tune! How horribly un-natural."

The way I see it, is that auto-tune is simply a 'tool', like a gtr tuner, drum dial, etc. Personally, I really don't care to hear 'out of tune' anything! So, if you work hard to get the best possible performance out of vocalist, and you have to use a tool like auto-tune to tighten things up, then so be it!

I think the problem exists when a producer, engineer or "do-it-yourself" band or artist, doesn't take the time to capture a great performance that is mostly in tune from the git-go. When you have a great performance to start with, and you really take the time to understand the program and what it's tolerances are, then you can create a 'really great' in tune performance and have the effect be virtually undetectable. A lot of folks just don't take the time to understand how to operate the software. They stick the tuner on in auto-mode or use the pencil tool to draw straight lines that force a note into pitch.

I know this thread is talking about the overuse of auto tune as an effect, however, I get tired of the bad rap that these tools get. Personally, I'm thankful that someone had the forsight to develop these types of products. It makes it lot easier on me and my clients to create an end product that pleasing to listen to.

[TonyBelmont]

Originally Posted by MFactProd

Personally, I never really understood the "big" debate about auto-tune, melodyne, etc. No one ever made a big deal when strobe or digital guitar tuners came out. You never heard anyone criticize someone for the 'overuse' and 'abuse' of these little gadgets.

"hey joe did you hear "so and so's" last record? The guitars are all in tune! How horribly un-natural."

The way I see it, is that auto-tune is simply a 'tool', like a gtr tuner, drum dial, etc. Personally, I really don't care to hear 'out of tune' anything! So, if you work hard to get the best possible performance out of vocalist, and you have to use a tool like auto-tune to tighten things up, then so be it!

I think the problem exists when a producer, engineer or "do-it-yourself" band or artist, doesn't take the time to capture a great performance that is mostly in tune from the git-go. When you have a great performance to start with, and you really take the time to understand the program and what it's tolerances are, then you can create a 'really great' in tune performance and have the effect be virtually undetectable. A lot of folks just don't take the time to understand how to operate the software. They stick the tuner on in auto-mode or use the pencil tool to draw straight lines that force a note into pitch.

I know this thread is talking about the overuse of auto tune as an effect, however, I get tired of the bad rap that these tools get. Personally, I'm thankful that someone had the forsight to develop these types of products. It makes it lot easier on me and my clients to create an end product that pleasing to listen to.

I think as a tool it is fine and very useful... it's the misuse and abuse of said tool that bothers me.

[Jules]

I think it has become a signature sound for some acts..

Chili Peppers vocal sound anyone?

It may have become built in to some artists expectation of what a professional sound is.

That is pretty scary.. but I think it's where we have ended up..

[Sk106]

I find music, and mixes/recordings, are the most interesting as a representation of somebodies craft, somebodies real doings. It's kind of a sensation of excitement, to see if they pulled it off, How well they pulled it off etc. But whenever something is auto anything, then you know it's not a representation of anybody, it's flawless, perfect, plastic .. there's no anticipation, nothing to "check out", no excitement, whatever you hear requires no hardcore effort and real skill to pull off. That's what autotuning does to me.

Why not automixing as well? There are those systems out there, like the Prosonic Automix, that works very well and renders a whole lot better results than many engineers do - and instantly. If that's used, then I'm not interested in the recording and/or mixing of it either

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by MFactProd

Personally, I never really understood the "big" debate about auto-tune, melodyne, etc. No one ever made a big deal when strobe or digital guitar tuners came out. You never heard anyone criticize someone for the 'overuse' and 'abuse' of these little gadgets.

Last time i checked, guitar tuners didn't actually play guitar for you. It's a reference tool and as any player knows, it's only half the battle towards being in tune because the set up and most importantly, playing technique/ear training is the most important step towards being in tune. But you still should be able to tune a guitar without any electronic aid.

Overuse of Autotune could be compared to a blues guitar player eschewing bending and using a Whammy pedal for everything.

Originally Posted by MFactProd

"hey joe did you hear "so and so's" last record? The guitars are all in tune! How horribly un-natural."

Guitars are NEVER in tune! But some players make them sound more in tune than others.

Originally Posted by MFactProd

The way I see it, is that auto-tune is simply a 'tool', like a gtr tuner, drum dial, etc. Personally, I really don't care to hear 'out of tune' anything! So, if you work hard to get the best possible performance out of vocalist, and you have to use a tool like auto-tune to tighten things up, then so be it!

Yeah, that's the standard justification. But I think it just SUCKS ASS! I hate it and it sounds like shit....(now I feel better)....

In a perverse way, it's probably a blessing that Autotune is sonically so obvious that even 'laymen' can hear it. It never will replace great vocals. The problem with a lot of 'radio pop' isn't that the vocals are in tune obviously. The problem is that the vocals are totally devoid of emotion and BALLS and that the singers often are lazy because they know that the engineer will 'fix it in the mix'. A certain amount of sweat and pain is required for getting a great vocal performance.

They played Elvis' 'Heartbreak Hotel' on the radio tonight. It sounded INCREDIBLE. The vocal performance is perfect, Elvis was in total control. WTF is wrong with singers these days?

Yes, Autotune is a 'modern audio tool' but I still reserve the right to hate it!

[MFactProd]

Uh....the last time I checked, auto-tune was not actually singing the notes for the singer. I understand where you're coming from though doorknocker about singers today not developing and improving their vocal chops. If technology has had any ill effect on society, it's that it's made us pretty lazy. However, it's not the fault of the software that the performances lack soul, heart, balls, etc. That's the fault of the performer or the individual(s) producing the performer. Auto-tune, can not add emotion to the performance, just make it in tune.

The fact of the matter is that the human voice is one of the most imperfect and unpredictable instruments on the planet! And it is arguably the most difficult instrument to master. It is incredibly susceptible to a great many external factors (psychological, physiological, environmental, etc.).

I'm sure MR. Presley did not nail his vocal takes in one or two takes. There are very few people in this world that have that kind of control over their human instrument. It was probably a very exhausting and time consuming process for all involved. And I'm pretty sure that if auto-tune would have existed back then, they would have used it.

I guess, it's your prerogative to hate auto-tune if you want. I just think that your ill feelings might be a bit misdirected. I guess my point is that you should direct those feelings towards the individuals who don't take the time to get it right from the start.

[clorax hurd]

Originally Posted by KeithAdv

I don't meant the Cher-effect use of it, which I think of more as a special effect or studio trick. Although I do still continue to hear that being used today by unimaginative producers.

i think that cher's producer was unimaginative. check this song which was released before that (imo crap) song by Cher
YouTube - Roy Vedas - Fragments of Life

[JP11]

Originally Posted by MFactProd

I'm sure MR. Presley did not nail his vocal takes in one or two takes. There are very few people in this world that have that kind of control over their human instrument. It was probably a very exhausting and time consuming process for all involved. And I'm pretty sure that if auto-tune would have existed back then, they would have used it.

I'm not so sure about that. I don't know how many takes they did, but I do believe Mr. Presley absolutely and without a doubt had the chops to do it in one take.

There are many many singers today and of course in the past who also have the chops, all different styles...I would venture to guess many of Bob Dylan's classics are complete takes with no funny business.

to answer the OP's question, yes it's a trend and a sound, the obviousness will probably pass, but you can't put milk back in the bottle.

[Sk106]

Originally Posted by MFactProd

I'm sure MR. Presley did not nail his vocal takes in one or two takes. There are very few people in this world that have that kind of control over their human instrument. It was probably a very exhausting and time consuming process for all involved.

My experience is precisly the opposite actually. (and no, I'm not saying I'm Elvis). I would think it depends on what kinds of musician's we're used to working with. The better ones I worked with, you just give them the note sheet, put them at the mic and hit record and 3 mins later you're done - no matter what is on the note-sheet. Works like conveyor belt. Professional musicians, for example in orchestras, does that every day all their lives, many good singers are like that too, so it's nothing that unusual.
To me, the first take is the only true take. The second take is an increasingly stale imitation of the first, and the third is where you start thinking "if this one don't work then ... what?", the impatience and/or nerves starts settling in.

[doorknocker]

Originally Posted by Sk106

To me, the first take is the only true take. The second take is just a slightly un-easy imitation of the first, and the third is where you start thinking "if this don't work then .. god", the nerves or impatience starts settling in.

I agree and actually this is where 'modern tools' can be helpful. If you have that perfect first take with 3 bum notes then you might just address these and be done with it. Unfortunately it never stops at that.

But like the title of this thread says, it's really not about that but rather the way that Autotune is being used as an effect much like reverb or delay. And THAT is very unfortunate I think. Nobody is complaining about fixing a few notes here and there, and like others have said, this has been done for ages.

I just did a project with a great singer where at least two songs were first takes vocal-wise. If a singer is confident and has his stuff together then that's not ususual actually. But there are other songs where it takes longer. But I wouldn't do more than 5 or so takes anyway. If it's not happening on that day then we simply do another session, big deal.

Frank Sinatra was known for practicing really hard before entering the studio and then nailing the songs in a few takes. That's the way it should be I think because the biggest illusion is thinking that these 'modern tools' are saving you time. They won't, unless you are o.k with a mediocre end product.

[LRhodes]

the King would have said, "Sam, lay off that robo-mammajama." If he was comfortable with the tune, E was never pichy , dawg. TCBstike

[phillysoulman]

Originally Posted by Sigma

chillin.. i got a 4:30 session today.. till then?... bored..gordon was over for a BBQ yesterday evening ..slow cooked ribs, jerk chicken ..gezpatcho and zuchinnini with tyme , oil and grated cheese [all veggie plates made with stuff from my garden] ..had a few hetic weeks in the studfio... i missed kay williams funeral ..had to work

Marrone!!!! I coming soon..get the groceries ready!!

[Bierce85]

Originally Posted by KeithAdv

I couldn't get over how horrible the soundtrack of "Across the Universe" was because of it. It never occurred to me that maybe they wanted it to sound that way. But more and more lately I'm hearing it being casually thrown in, not just because of pitch correction but because they seem to like the metallic sound of it.

I heard they tracked 90% of the vocals for that movie while shooting video. This would explain the need to tune things a bit. It's not easy to pull of beatles vocals while acting.

[phillysoulman]

Originally Posted by TonyBelmont

I think as a tool it is fine and very useful... it's the misuse and abuse of said tool that bothers me.

thumbsupthumbsupWord..

[Bierce85]

There's a local radio station here that plays R&B on Sunday and occasionally I'll tune in just to hear if anything decent might pop up. To this day, I still haven't heard anything I'd call "decent" or even "not without it's charm". Hip Hop, rap and even reggae seem to be in a pretty sad state these days.. Homogenized sounding stuff that sounds like it was written by a computer program...

Anyway, I'm hearing the thick autotune on just about everything they play and I really think it's the "if everyone jumped off a bridge..." mentality at play here. Somehow, these naive musicians got the idea that it has to be there in order to have a hit song so it's just the sound of R&B vocals right now. Who knows, maybe it does. But you know... usually I'll argue that a producer shouldn't try to override a musicians wishes but perhaps we all have to get together on this one and put a ban on autotune and over compressed/limited mastering while we're at it for the good of mankind's ears.