Autotuning a lot of vocals, what do you think about it?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheComposer
  • Start date Start date
WHOA!!!! We have a Famous Beagle too!!!!!!

Famous DAVE and Famous Beagle ..... That's like Superman and his dog ~ Krypto the Superdog.
 
i have used the Manual Pitch Corrector in Cubase 5, from time too time.. to correct the odd note or two.. but Autotuners are a over produced effect, it proves modern musicians can't actually sing.. you take all the expensive studio gear from half the people the studios are bringing out now days and suddenly, the world would stop buying their stuff, technology is advancing, it's great to be honest, but with it those with talent are being left behind, and those without have No.1 singles out.
JB. :(
 
Meh auto tune is played out. If you cant sing you probably shouldnt be recording anyway. jimmys69 I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who auto tunes buttocks
 
IMO 'Auto tune' needs to be re-defined here.

Autotune as that stupid 'Cher' effect, needs to be destroyed, or at least buried as a bad phase in music taste. If you feel 'any' pitch correction is an ab-oration, and want to be pure, then delete your EQ plugins and record on stone tablets with a chisel because that would be the only 'pure' recording method.

IMO, there are 3 types of uses for autotune--

Use of autotune for an effect: Trying to recreate an overused effect because they think that is 'how it is done' to make it sound like everyone else in the genre.

Use of autotune to fix a bad performance because there is no chance of the performer actually singing perfectly in pitch. I have had many requests for this...

Use of autotune as a basic performance fine tuning that I am sure most competent singers use. I bet Adam Lambert has some Melodyne up his butt! lol.

I would never 'not' use a compressor because it would interfere with the true nature of the recording or performers 'real' sound. Unless asked by the performer to do so. In my experience it is my job to use every tool I can to make a performance all that it can be. Even if that means altering the natural tone or pitch of the performance. Every singer I have worked with has embraced a bit of pitch correction. I would balk a singer who wanted to be out of pitch. Or at least direct him to another location for recording.

Just my opinion. I am sure there are others that would disagree. I will gladly send the ones I come across who don't want to use tools to improve the quality of their performance to you.

Jimmy
 
"It really is amazing to think that, back in the 50s and earlier, those people recorded those amazing performances completely live in one take. (I mean, they did numerous takes obviously, but the final take was one continuous performance.) The talent that takes is truly remarkable and, IMO, largely absent in today's world."

They do the same thing in films today. Watch any modern file with a dance or action sequence. Then watch a Fred Astaire dance sequence. 1 Camera, no cuts. At some point the camera might pan or zoom, but they were specifically trying to show the talent of the performer, to be able to do it all in 1 take.

That's what's missing in today's "Professionals". That's the different between raw, natural talent and what I do with splicing and dicing. :)

I'm not a big fan of autotune or pitch correcting.

Mike
 
I am not a 'fan' either. Though most of us here, it seems, are not lucky enough to have that caliber of talent wandering into our studio. Even when great talent arrives, the desire to record a perfect performance, regardless of budget or time, results in using tuning software.

That is just my experience tho.
 
But one has to also realize that often they would do dozens and dozens of takes...waiting for the one perfect take.

Is that really any different???

So like...you record a part 3 times and each time it's almost perfect except on each take there are one or two notes "off" here or there.
What do you *REALLY achieve* by doing another 20 takes before you luck out and hit everything perfectly...VS...simply using your initial 3 takes and just comping those 1-2 notes from one of the three takes...???
Think about it.... ;)

If they had digital editing back in the 50s....I doubt that they wouldn't have used it.
 
Well, I guess hourly I would be able to charge more. LOL.

I would much rather spend one hour with a talented singer giving true emotion to a take; with one hour of pitch correcting, than spend two hours trying to find the correct pitch and finding a way to 'EQ' the emotion of their performance. The latter is not a possibility.

In a perfect world, everything would be perfectly performed, perfectly pitched, and perfectly perfect. Until that happens.............
 
Well, golly gee- That's the way my first album was done. No comp tracks, no pitch correction, no samples. nada. The mixing engineer thought it was "quaint". Almost all of it was done in 3 takes or less, except my wife's harp track (no, not harmonica). She had just had shoulder surgery, and it really did take 37 takes. Some of the guide tracks took almost that many. The key with that kind of recording is that it's *not* perfect, it is- human. The hardest thing is to know where to draw the line. Sometimes you have to say, "That sucks, Richie. It's not the best you can do. Take 35. And sometimes, you have to say, "That's not perfect because I'm not perfect. I could do that 1000 times and I'd find 1000 little ways to screw it up. That's the best I can do- It's a wrap." Knowing the difference between those 2 things is the essence of old-style production. The other essence is having the talent , either yours, or somebody else's, that shows up prepared to play the material. In my case, I was lucky enough to have a guitar god, a bass badass, and 2 backing vocalists who are all "one take Sallys". I told the overdub staff, who are from all over the country, when we started, "Your job is to make me sound good. My job is to make your job-possible". Sure, I have the expertise to do seamless digital editing. I can use loops and Melodyne, and lots of other stuff, but that wasn't what I was trying to do. Are there flaws in it? You betcha. But it doesn't sound like The Corrs, either. We had pure fun, and I am friends for life with every person who worked on the project. And I have every intention of doing it again, before I'm too old or too sick.-Richie
 
miroslav said:
But one has to also realize that often they would do dozens and dozens of takes...waiting for the one perfect take.

Is that really any different???

So like...you record a part 3 times and each time it's almost perfect except on each take there are one or two notes "off" here or there.
What do you *REALLY achieve* by doing another 20 takes before you luck out and hit everything perfectly...VS...simply using your initial 3 takes and just comping those 1-2 notes from one of the three takes...???
Think about it.... ;)

If they had digital editing back in the 50s....I doubt that they wouldn't have used it.
Click to expand...

Well, the difference is that doing multiple takes in hopes of "getting it right" is all the while making you a better musician, because it's practice. Whereas just stopping and letting the computer fix it is not.

From the perspective of a commercial studio, it's certainly easier to just push a button on the computer (though I don't know why you wouldn't want the extra business of someone taking longer to record their vocal), but I thought this was home recording. I don't run a commercial studio, and I'm always surprised at the number of people here, on the home recording board, that have full-blown pro studios.
 
That album consists of mostly queefs. It is hard to distuguish this after adjustment to modulation in Melodyne. They take on a much more 'farty' sound.
 
famous beagle said:
Well, the difference is that doing multiple takes in hopes of "getting it right" is all the while making you a better musician, because it's practice. Whereas just stopping and letting the computer fix it is not.
Click to expand...

For vocals...doing 35 takes is simply not good for the voice. If I have 3-5 really good takes, but I need to comp a word or phrase from one take to another...well, that's really not the *computer* fixing it.
If there is a note or two note slightly off pitch...that's not about getting something *wrong* and that you need to keep practicing it.
However, if the vocals are off key throughout the whole song, and you are using autotune to correct...that's a different thing altogether, and probably does require practice and vocal training.

When it comes to instrument parts...it's not much different. If I lay down 3-5 really good guitar leads...but happened to like one or two licks from one take and a couple from another take...comping them into one track isn't about the computer doing it for me...they are still MY guitar parts and my playing. Also...if I hit a string a bit too aggressively on a couple of notes, and it goes a tad sharp in a couple of spots...that also has nothing to do with needing to practice and do another 30 takes. The simple/smart solution is to just pitch-correct those one or two notes...and move on, since overall the guitar takes are all good.

This is is not about fabricating something that is not "real"...it's about polishing off some of the small quirks...which is done ALL THE TIME in studios. I agree that sometimes a great but not perfect performance can sound more interesting with the quirks...but it really depends on the performance and the song. One sour note in an otherwise great performance doesn't always sound "real"...it just sounds sour, and why torture yourself or the talent over one note if you can easily tweak it...and move on.

famous beagle said:
I don't run a commercial studio, and I'm always surprised at the number of people here, on the home recording board, that have full-blown pro studios.
Click to expand...

Does that bother you?
Do you feel like "home recording" should only go to the level of a couple of mics in some makeshift basement "studio" next to the washer & dryer and furnace. :D ;)

Hey...you only live once....unless you're James Bond!
Some people will spend thousands on a 2-week vacation in some beach resort....me, I prefer to buy a some audio gear and spend those same two weeks in my home recording studio. Also...some of us have been at it for many years...and gear just accumulates and studio space grows. :)
 
People need to stop being lazy! If you cant sing a note well, practice and practice untill you can. If you cant be bothered to sit around through 100 takes untill you or the performer hits the right note, then in all honesty you shouldn't be producing. Auto tune to correct the odd note, yeah I get it. sometimes you get the perfect take but have a note out of shape. Now its at a point where artists are produced cause they look good over the fact that they are a good . . . artist, thats when I get pissed!!
 
benherron.rrr said:
People need to stop being lazy! If you cant sing a note well, practice and practice until you can. If you cant be bothered to sit around through 100 takes until you or the performer hits the right note, then in all honesty you shouldn't be producing. Auto tune to correct the odd note, yeah I get it. sometimes you get the perfect take but have a note out of shape. Now its at a point where artists are produced cause they look good over the fact that they are a good . . . artist, thats when I get pissed!!
Click to expand...

I don't get it....

You say you get the thing about how it's OK fixing the odd note...but you also say it's lazy not to want to sit for 100 takes???

Mmmmmm...have you ever really sat for 100 takes in a row of the same track???
I guarantee you will stop before you get to 50.

That is a TOTALLY mindless waste of time and energy! :D
First off...it you can't get a *solid* 3-5 takes right off, I would stop and move on to something else or sit down and work out why you can't get a solid 3-5 takes right off.
But if your first few takes are solid, with only a glitch here and there....OK, if you want to try for a few more to see if you can improve, fine, but after a dozen or two, and it's NOT imporving...doing another 80 takes isn't going to help much. :(
You reach a point of diminishing returns becuase as you fix one part, now the rest of the take is starting to sound stale/tired...BECAUSE...the performer is getting tired!

There's a natural "curve" for doing takes....someone did a basic overview awhile back.
It goes something like...
During the first 3-5 takes, everything is fresh and it has that "first take" natural energy, then things will start to slide off if you keep doing more takes. Now, for *some* people, if they keep going, they may get a "second wind" somewhere around the 20th take, but then after that it just rolls off.........................

Your voice gets tired, your hands get tired, your brain gets tired, your ears get tired....how's it going to improve at take 100???
I would rather move on to something else and come back to that track the next day or several hours later rather than beating on it for more than a dozen takes in a row.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top