antares atr1a

  • Thread starter Thread starter docpaul
  • Start date Start date
Ok I'm gonna jump in here

I've used the whole Auto-Tune thing for a while. I have the plug-in, and it is OK (as long as you always hit the note). The silly thing about auto tune is that if you can already sing really well, then it will make you sound incredibly perfect. Using an attack time of 30ms or more makes the whole process fairly invisible, also (see below). However, if you can't hit the note, then auto-tune will only tip you to the closest note, which it may have difficulty determining if you waver a lot.

On a side note, having auto tune actually forced me to learn how to sing better! Go figure.

However, Antares does warble, even when you sing really well. Something wrong with their algorithem, I think. Even the best, most in-tune performance will usually have maybe one or two warbles for no good reason. Kind of ruins the illusion, if you know what I mean.

Graphical mode is a massive pain in the ass. I have no patience, and would rather sing it again rather than spend an hour fixing the first take.

I just got a TC Helicon Voiceworks. It (and VoiceOne) feature TC's answer to Autotune. I noticed right away that it is far more steady than Antares. My vocal takes no longer warble.

It also has different parameters than Antares: a "Correction Window" where YOU control how many cents out-of-tune a note can be before it doesn't get corrected, and "Amount" which controls just how much a note gets corrected (measured in percentages. For example, if I set it to 80% then a note 10 cents flat will be corrected by 5 cents, and a note 50 cents flat will be corrected by about 40 cents. I don't understand their math, either, but it does cut down on that "too perfect to be real" sound.) The third setting is of course the standard "Attack" time.

The nice thing about the "Correction Window" is that if you set it to about 75 cents, then you can still sing uncharted accidentals, and the autotune won't try to fix it (and warble because you are right between 2 notes).

I really like tracking my vocals through the Voiceworks Autotune, maybe because I learned (from past experience with Antares) to sing very precisely, and now every time I record with Pitch Correction on it sounds really natural. The secret really is that Correction Window--it allows you some leeway before correcting you.
 
If you can sing, then there's really no need for the autotune.... and if you can't sing, then you have no business being recorded in the first place!!!!!!!!!!!

:p
 
I think I'm going to start charging and extra and totally seperate auto-tuning rate, like $50 an hour for me to sit and draw out the melody that you just couldn't hit
 
Tell that to Madonna and JLo, Blue Bear!:D

I don't use pitch correction because I can't sing. I can, and I'm good. I use it to save time on retakes, and because I WANT that "too in-tune to be real" sound that is pop music right now. Pitch-processing a vocal that sounds really good to you already just takes it to the next level.

Unless you want to sound like Madonna or Boy George (or Cyndi Lauper) in the 80's, pitch correction of some kind is a necessity. Back then, that's how singers sounded, so the public accepted it. Now the masses have realized that perfection is possible, and they don't want to hear the occasional off or "nearly there" note.

Turn on the radio; everyone--punk, rock, pop, dance and electonica, R&B--everyone sonds perfect. Is it mass voice lessons or magic?

My guess is magic.:cool:



To go Freudian on you, I guess my big personal issue is overcompensation--I record vocals in my bedroom, so I go overboard to ensure that the finished product is totally professional sounding, so nobody would ever guess.
If pitch correction is overboard. I really believe it's the new standard; the rule, not the Cher exception.
 
Well.... I got the rackmount one in the mail the other day. I got the Antares ATR1A, not the unit with all the mic simulations.

Here's my findings. Blue Bear is right in the fact that if the singer is more than about 30 cents off.... the thing is not useable. (That means 1/3 of one half step of music) The advertisements state that this thing is for fixing that incredible vocal track with one really bad note in it. It is not good for that purpose.

The other thing that hurts it's performance is a singer with a ton of virbrato. I think the vibrato narrows the useable range to about 15 or 20 cents off of tune. I tried it on a couple of songs that I had recorded of a lady singer with a lot of vibrato.... using a number of different sensitivity settings.

My voice on the other had.... I don't hit real clinkers. But I seldom sing right exactly on pitch for more than a couple of measures. When I ran my voice through it on a couple of songs... set to the manual suggested settings or even tighter.... it applied at times about 10 cents or so either way of tune through out the song. And it was without artifacts..... except EQ. Seems I had to brighten up the fixed track a little to make it match eq wise the un-fixed track. But it did improve my voice. I think being on pitch is a positive thing. But my voice has almost zero vibrato.

If you loop it so that you end up with a fixed track and an un-fixed track... you can't play them together..... unless you want a flanger effect on the vocal. That's what the 4mms delay makes it sound like.

Has a bypass button on it so you can easily go from tune mode to bypass while on the fly. The functionality is a no brainer. Will take you about 30 minutes to understand it (without reading the manual).

Worth $300 bucks. I don't know. It depends on the vocal you're trying to fix. I'll keep mine at least for a while..... because it did work for me. (my voice has it's own natural artifacts built in that aren't intonation related.... so being on pitch helps it). If I find myself not using it sometime in the future.... I'll sell it for whatever I can get out of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top