B
bdemenil
New member
I've been using 1.3 with win2K. Version 3, on the other hand, I don't think is out for windows yet (at least they don't have a windows demo of it available at the Antares web site).
zip
New member
crosstudio said:
I've been networking with all the engineers in town and I'm afraid all of them have the little black box next to their console...
...When questioned they said MANY recordings in the major market use autotune at some level or another...the talented acts less >> the less well emmmm...more.
Seems it may be the truth BUT...
...what was also said is it is generally not used on EVERY note so not to strip the character out of a performance...so it you want to be good....PRACTICE!!
For what it's worth...
zip >>
L
LongWaveStudio
New member
it's true!most of us have this autotune for the worst case scenario! what ever studio im producing in, it's always there. it's a great tool if you're mixing, and there's one note you've suddenly noticed which is just a few touches out in pitch. ive got unusual sounds out of it by putting guitar solos through it, and once a snare drum.
B
bdemenil
New member
If you're going to tune 1 note at a time, couldn't you just do a manual pitch shift?
sjoko2
New member
In the end, its just a tool.
I think the next "toy", which is already available, is much more freightening, and while, like I said before, I will use autotune to fix things when that is in preference to scrapping a good performance, I would draw the line with the next one:
The voice modeller. Not a joke, this is reality.
What is it? Its a bit like Amp Farm, but where the farm models guitar amps and speaker configurations, but instead, it gives you the choice of popular artists.
Choose Peter Gabriel for your voice, and the modeller will give your voice the tembre, spectral image, tone, whatever, of Peter's voice. I really think that's like theft, gross, and pretty repulsive
I think the next "toy", which is already available, is much more freightening, and while, like I said before, I will use autotune to fix things when that is in preference to scrapping a good performance, I would draw the line with the next one:
The voice modeller. Not a joke, this is reality.
What is it? Its a bit like Amp Farm, but where the farm models guitar amps and speaker configurations, but instead, it gives you the choice of popular artists.
Choose Peter Gabriel for your voice, and the modeller will give your voice the tembre, spectral image, tone, whatever, of Peter's voice. I really think that's like theft, gross, and pretty repulsive
zip
New member
NO SHIT!!!
As a vocalists I'm insulted even THINKING about it!! Although I'm a good singer I doubt anyone would want to recreate me... BUT why on earth would anyone doing anything remotely serious consider this??
It should be BANNED from studio use!!
zip >>
As a vocalists I'm insulted even THINKING about it!! Although I'm a good singer I doubt anyone would want to recreate me... BUT why on earth would anyone doing anything remotely serious consider this??
It should be BANNED from studio use!!
zip >>
sjoko2
New member
Are you kidding? Companies are creating bands.... Look at A&R adverts:
Current thing: "we are looking for a new act, has to sound like Dave M band".
That's how they work, that's what they are looking for. Just look at the heap of Eddie V clones?
Current thing: "we are looking for a new act, has to sound like Dave M band".
That's how they work, that's what they are looking for. Just look at the heap of Eddie V clones?
C
Chibi Nappa
New member
I think a lot of people are getting upset about the wrong thing. So what if it makes a singer do something he really can't. The same has been true since the first punch in. So these days it is done in one easy step with a box. Before it was done with more complicated manual correction or comping of parts. The result is the same. You hear something the guy can't really sing. Is it really a truer performace if you are hearing the beginnig of a phrase (or word even) from take 20 pasted together with the end of a phrase from take 46, and then having that result copied and pasted to every chorus? Not to me it isn't.
I came to a conclusion a few years ago. This top 40 stuff is not art, is not meant to have any integrity, and should not be treated as such. It is a product cranked out to make money. That is all it ever will be. Furthermore, I am free to totally ignore it. I can listen to Bella Fleck knowing full well that it is the tallent of the musicians I am enjoying. Heck, for the ultimate in unspoiled recordings I can listen to Medeski Martain and Wood's "Tonic" album. That particular album was recorded live with no sound reinforcement. A single sterio mic was put in the room. That's it.(the album sounds great, by the way).
If I do enjoy a top 40 song for whatever reason, I know where the real credit belongs, and this is what does annoy me. Why should Britteny Spears or N-Sync be making all this money and having all this fame? What did they actually do? I bet most of what the masses like about them comes from the skills of somebody else. The producer, recording/mixing engineer, mastering engineer, songwriter, choriographer, video producer, costume designer, personal trainer, plastic surgeon
. Take that away and what do these "artists" have? So why are they getting the credit? All I know is that if you put Britteny Spears in a room with nothing but herself, she could not entertain thousands of people. Put Eric Clapton, Vic Wooten, John Medeski, Tony Rice etc in a room with nothing but thier instruments, and yeah, it's an entertaining event I'd pay to see.
So as I see it, that is the problem, credit not going where it belongs. A box that corrects pitch problems changes nothing. Sorry if this wandered off topic a bit. My rant mode got to me
I came to a conclusion a few years ago. This top 40 stuff is not art, is not meant to have any integrity, and should not be treated as such. It is a product cranked out to make money. That is all it ever will be. Furthermore, I am free to totally ignore it. I can listen to Bella Fleck knowing full well that it is the tallent of the musicians I am enjoying. Heck, for the ultimate in unspoiled recordings I can listen to Medeski Martain and Wood's "Tonic" album. That particular album was recorded live with no sound reinforcement. A single sterio mic was put in the room. That's it.(the album sounds great, by the way).
If I do enjoy a top 40 song for whatever reason, I know where the real credit belongs, and this is what does annoy me. Why should Britteny Spears or N-Sync be making all this money and having all this fame? What did they actually do? I bet most of what the masses like about them comes from the skills of somebody else. The producer, recording/mixing engineer, mastering engineer, songwriter, choriographer, video producer, costume designer, personal trainer, plastic surgeon
. Take that away and what do these "artists" have? So why are they getting the credit? All I know is that if you put Britteny Spears in a room with nothing but herself, she could not entertain thousands of people. Put Eric Clapton, Vic Wooten, John Medeski, Tony Rice etc in a room with nothing but thier instruments, and yeah, it's an entertaining event I'd pay to see. So as I see it, that is the problem, credit not going where it belongs. A box that corrects pitch problems changes nothing. Sorry if this wandered off topic a bit. My rant mode got to me
barefoot
barefootsound.com
In the end real talent will always come through. Brittany Spears sucks, Autotune or not.
Who knows, maybe a few singers will even learn how to 'play' some of these effects just like some great guitarists have learned to 'play' their effects.
I'm sure there were many people who scoffed at guitar effects when they came out, and still do. "Where's the talent when you have these boxes to play through?!!!" Well, a lot of half assed players do hide behind boxes. But there are also players who from a straight technical perspective might be limited, but they sure have learned how to make those boxes sing! [I'm thinking of guys like The Edge]
barefoot
Who knows, maybe a few singers will even learn how to 'play' some of these effects just like some great guitarists have learned to 'play' their effects.
I'm sure there were many people who scoffed at guitar effects when they came out, and still do. "Where's the talent when you have these boxes to play through?!!!" Well, a lot of half assed players do hide behind boxes. But there are also players who from a straight technical perspective might be limited, but they sure have learned how to make those boxes sing! [I'm thinking of guys like The Edge]
barefoot
zip
New member
The REAL reason....
The reason Record Labels produce and manufacture bands is because a whopping 92% of all recordings LOSE money. That leaves a mere 8% of commecial stuff to shoulder the load of the entire industry.
So no...I am not kidding...
I understand the finacial realities but I don't have to like the trend.
Now next question....is the 8% of the current trend really that much better (70's disco,80's Grunge,90's POP) or via radio play and promotions is the public brainwashed into thinking it is???
zip >>
The reason Record Labels produce and manufacture bands is because a whopping 92% of all recordings LOSE money. That leaves a mere 8% of commecial stuff to shoulder the load of the entire industry.
So no...I am not kidding...
I understand the finacial realities but I don't have to like the trend.
Now next question....is the 8% of the current trend really that much better (70's disco,80's Grunge,90's POP) or via radio play and promotions is the public brainwashed into thinking it is???
zip >>
G
greggybud
New member
sjoko2 said:
sojo...is this similar or completely different technology than Steinbergs Free Filter? Free Filter can accomplish this to a very limited degree already.
sjoko2
New member
this one is different, a stand alone box, soon to be released. I found it a very strange experience to play with it. Tried different things with a singer, she had trouble singing as she could hear her changed voice through the cans.
It basically works like amp farm and modelling gear like that, only it models timbre, tone and intonation.
I tried a bit myself, and I could actually make myself sound like some well-known singers.
While I do use autotune and see that as a tool any commercial studio has to have, this one does not interest me at all, I wouldn't buy it. (I suppose they won't send me anything to try anyway now, if anyone reads this
It basically works like amp farm and modelling gear like that, only it models timbre, tone and intonation.
I tried a bit myself, and I could actually make myself sound like some well-known singers.
While I do use autotune and see that as a tool any commercial studio has to have, this one does not interest me at all, I wouldn't buy it. (I suppose they won't send me anything to try anyway now, if anyone reads this
W
Wallycleaver
New member
barefoot said:
Yes please. I'll take one!
Cyrokk
Farce of Nature
rant and roll
Hmmm…
I have both the original CD release and the remastered release of Led Zeppelin’s Presence. On the original release Bob’s sustained vocal on Tea For One “baby when I feeeeeeel this way” popped out horribly out of tune.. causing me to cringe during this part of one of their best underrated songs.. But when Page thankfully had the catalogue remastered that sustained note was brought down into the overall mix just enough to restore completely the magic of the song..
This was pre-autotune days, so don’t tell me that this gadget is necessary, because it isn’t. Bob had his out of tune days, but he can still give me chills even after the thousandth listening of the Zep catalogue, and the same thing goes for Sabbath, Diamondhead, ACDC, Deep Purple and Maiden.. Those “artists” who are slaves to the autotune are dime-a-dozens who will have to resort to starring in films or public scandalization (or whatever it takes to get them continuous coverage on Entertainment Tonight) in order to avoid being completely forgotten.
I don’t see myself purchasing a voice modeller either.. The vocalist for Kingdom Come disgusted everyone because he sounded so close to Plant.. Where are they now?
Hmmm…
I have both the original CD release and the remastered release of Led Zeppelin’s Presence. On the original release Bob’s sustained vocal on Tea For One “baby when I feeeeeeel this way” popped out horribly out of tune.. causing me to cringe during this part of one of their best underrated songs.. But when Page thankfully had the catalogue remastered that sustained note was brought down into the overall mix just enough to restore completely the magic of the song..
This was pre-autotune days, so don’t tell me that this gadget is necessary, because it isn’t. Bob had his out of tune days, but he can still give me chills even after the thousandth listening of the Zep catalogue, and the same thing goes for Sabbath, Diamondhead, ACDC, Deep Purple and Maiden.. Those “artists” who are slaves to the autotune are dime-a-dozens who will have to resort to starring in films or public scandalization (or whatever it takes to get them continuous coverage on Entertainment Tonight) in order to avoid being completely forgotten.
I don’t see myself purchasing a voice modeller either.. The vocalist for Kingdom Come disgusted everyone because he sounded so close to Plant.. Where are they now?
barefoot
barefootsound.com
Wallycleaver,
Funny.... and that's exactly the idea she's selling.
Well, not totally funny. The unfortunate thing is, since half the males fro 9 to 90 are on their knees whacking off to plastic teenage barbies, real teenage girls are looking up to these 'stars' as some sort of icons to emulate.
I can only hope that as my baby girl grows up my wife and I can help give her the mental power to rise above the tide and realize that playing the "power of p*ssy" isn't the noblest occupation.
barefoot
Funny.... and that's exactly the idea she's selling.
Well, not totally funny. The unfortunate thing is, since half the males fro 9 to 90 are on their knees whacking off to plastic teenage barbies, real teenage girls are looking up to these 'stars' as some sort of icons to emulate.
I can only hope that as my baby girl grows up my wife and I can help give her the mental power to rise above the tide and realize that playing the "power of p*ssy" isn't the noblest occupation.
barefoot
Last edited:
sjoko2
New member
Cy.you made the point exactly. All those you mention are ARTISTS, long term, with capital letters.
The rest will fall through the basket at some time or other.
The rest will fall through the basket at some time or other.
zip
New member
BRAVO!!!!
I may not be Robert Plant but at least when I sing it is ME......not some tone shifted, autuned recreation....
zip >>
I may not be Robert Plant but at least when I sing it is ME......not some tone shifted, autuned recreation....
zip >>
L
LongWaveStudio
New member
zip,
auto tune is used as a correction tool. it's pretty transparent to use on the odd note, so even if your vocals had a few notes of auto tune, it'd still be your voice. i think it's amazing how far technology has come to let you do this, but yeah, there is such thing as over use..
auto tune is used as a correction tool. it's pretty transparent to use on the odd note, so even if your vocals had a few notes of auto tune, it'd still be your voice. i think it's amazing how far technology has come to let you do this, but yeah, there is such thing as over use..
zip
New member
Longwavestudio...
I agree completely WHEN autotune is used as a tool for the few notes you may not completely hit in an otherwise good performance. Trust me...when I can buy one I probably will to save on tracking time...
I just don't like the idea of singers downright faking it in the studio so they can fake it live (or worst lip sync!!).
Technology is great and I'm all for it - IF used as a tool and not on every other note in a performance!
Maybe I'm jus' ol' school!!
zip >>
I agree completely WHEN autotune is used as a tool for the few notes you may not completely hit in an otherwise good performance. Trust me...when I can buy one I probably will to save on tracking time...
I just don't like the idea of singers downright faking it in the studio so they can fake it live (or worst lip sync!!).
Technology is great and I'm all for it - IF used as a tool and not on every other note in a performance!
Maybe I'm jus' ol' school!!
zip >>
sjoko2
New member
LongWave, totally right. I don't think I've ever done anything with autotune you can actually hear, ever.
Regarding the Btny thing, it takes some pretty deranged mindbending to understand it all. Suffice to say, it has NOTHING to do with music, everything with marketing.
If you hear some of her really old things, before she became known other than from the Disney stuff, she can sing. Now its an artificial, nasal squeek. It was done on one song, for a certain effect. The song became a hit, so now everything is written and produced for the squeek. Of cause, others saw the success and went the same squeekville route. Look at Janet J - Autotune squeekville Diva #1 And then there is Mariah, who is as talented as hell, with a huge voice. Unfortunately she entered squeekville as well, but did so with her boobs leading the way, on a good dose of confusion enhancing substances combined with an overinflated "iknowitallbetterthananyone" attitude. Of cause, a couple of years before this, she entered the "I can sing more notes per line" competition with Whitney.
Marketing leads .... art suffers
And to finish my rant, I don't think any of the above mentioned are remotely attractive!! I can't believe people wack off to btny, jeez they must all be severely deprived (in which case - the number of deprived males is somewhat worrying).
Regarding the Btny thing, it takes some pretty deranged mindbending to understand it all. Suffice to say, it has NOTHING to do with music, everything with marketing.
If you hear some of her really old things, before she became known other than from the Disney stuff, she can sing. Now its an artificial, nasal squeek. It was done on one song, for a certain effect. The song became a hit, so now everything is written and produced for the squeek. Of cause, others saw the success and went the same squeekville route. Look at Janet J - Autotune squeekville Diva #1 And then there is Mariah, who is as talented as hell, with a huge voice. Unfortunately she entered squeekville as well, but did so with her boobs leading the way, on a good dose of confusion enhancing substances combined with an overinflated "iknowitallbetterthananyone" attitude. Of cause, a couple of years before this, she entered the "I can sing more notes per line" competition with Whitney.
Marketing leads .... art suffers
And to finish my rant, I don't think any of the above mentioned are remotely attractive!! I can't believe people wack off to btny, jeez they must all be severely deprived (in which case - the number of deprived males is somewhat worrying).