Cheat or not cheat? That might be the question

[rob aylestone]

As we've been talking about it in another topic, I found this youtube video talking about recording in garages.

I note their aunt has been in touch. I think the evidence suggests very strongly this is NOT the acoustics of that garage space.
Pretty objective, I think.

 

[DM60]

Not much different than when a famous group acts like they are live recording in a studio or on TV IMO.

 

[Slouching Raymond]

Are they even real people miming in the garage, or just an AI apparition?

 

[TalismanRich]

Wow, this is really turning into a big deal. It reminded me of that Taylor Swift song....

'Cause the players gonna play, play, play, play, play
And the haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate
Baby, I'm just gonna shake, shake, shake, shake, shake
I shake it off, I shake it off

Heart-breakers gonna break, break, break, break, break
And the fakers gonna fake, fake, fake, fake, fake
Baby, I'm just gonna shake, shake, shake, shake, shake
I shake it off, I shake it off

 

[rob aylestone]

No Rich - it IS a big deal when we talk about the tiniest features of recordings all the time - people with mixes they have worked on for ages, that when they put them up, they find somebody spots the fret buzz, the one poorly bent note, the mistimed snare all those things. We are all working on improving recording. The trend to cheat (for that's what I believe the correct term is) is so popular and normal now that, it makes our efforts less good. If it's a good cheat, I'm OK with that, but spotting cheats is a very useful skill. No point striving for recording perfection if it's compared to another that cheated? I'm OK with cheating, but we should not try to pass cheating off as real.

I do it frequently - even with opera singers. Fixing this, tweaking that and that is OK for the end product, like the ones we discuss. What isn't acceptable to me is me passing it off as an example of Blumlein stereo recording, when the reverb came from two plug-ins, and the second verse was re-recorded in the studio because an idiot in the church slammed a door!

 

[brassplyer]

From what I gather they're from the Tempe/Mesa, AZ area, is anyone from the area and recognizes the parking garage?

 

[brassplyer]

Wow, this is really turning into a big deal. It reminded me of that Taylor Swift song....

'Cause the players gonna play, play, play, play, play
And the haters gonna hate, hate, hate, hate, hate
Baby, I'm just gonna shake, shake, shake, shake, shake
I shake it off, I shake it off

Heart-breakers gonna break, break, break, break, break
And the fakers gonna fake, fake, fake, fake, fake
Baby, I'm just gonna shake, shake, shake, shake, shake
I shake it off, I shake it off

Ultimately they *can* actually sing - I'd wager better than many/most of their detractors.

 

[rob aylestone]

They can indeed sing. That is not in question. What I am apparently alone on, is their assessment. Good, not great. Competent, not Callas.

 

[brassplyer]

They can indeed sing. That is not in question. What I am apparently alone on, is their assessment. Good, not great. Competent, not Callas.

What's your motivation for posting a "they're faking a parking garage video!" review put up by someone who themselves haven't made much of an impact as a musician?

Callas had a vocal instrument that was useful in one capacity, she wouldn't do well in the arena in which they operate.

 

[rob aylestone]

My motivation is because I firmly agree with Wings of Pegasus's Fil. He is right more than wrong.

I will say this again - You do not need to be able to do something to be competent in analysing, commenting and in some circumstance grading it. If your skill set enables accurate and analytical comment, then comment away. Probably first semester in teacher training. critical comment, marking and grading based on criteria. If you really are struggling with this concept, I cannot do anything about it. I deliberately chose Callas for that very reason. As an opera singer (like many other crossover artists) she couldn't sing pop - but what she 100% could do is comment on the voice, as you say, the instrument. She would have been extremely competent at identifying mistakes, bad practice, control and even safety. Many Opera trained singers are also very aware of biology - and how the voice operates and the methods of keeping it at tip-top performance.

Nice voices as in pleasant to listen to, do not have to conform to rules or even good practice. Some good singers are also bad singers at the same time, if bad is technique and good is pleasant to listen to. Bob Dylan would probably have failed singing exams - so would Joe Cocker, Rod Stewart and and the front men of bands like AC/DC - but they are crazily popular and their sound is their hallmark. People love the raw sound, but that's not good singing in technical terms - but it's good singing in popularist terms. We also have the people who were technically amazing singers like Dame Kiri Tikanawa who wrecked some pop songs. She could not master singing without her training.

I guess, though - what we are really talking about here is 'nice' singers having big followings which make people think they are somehow better than others. Being popular does not mean you are a superb singer. What criteria should we use? Youtube likes? I prefer voices where the singer has control of their 'instrument', and sadly, this is one area where the kids we are using as just one example struggle. Got vibrato, so it's permanently switched on, even on phrases where it should be pure sounding. Uncontrolled and rigid vibrato is content limiting - I would not give work to somebody who lacked the ability to switch it off, I'd give it to somebody else.

One day, we will discover the tweaking the videos these young performers actually had - and garages do NOT sound like cathedrals.

 

[brassplyer]

Apparently you and Fil have really strong feelings about parking garage promo videos. What I mostly care about is whether they can actually sing well. They can.

You acknowledge that you're not in their league as a singer but don't think they're all that. Okay. I'm guessing they'll manage to carry on somehow without your, Fil's or Raymond's endorsement.

 

[rob aylestone]

They can sing - not bad, but certainly NOT brilliantly. As I have repeatedly said - reviewers do not happen to need to be able to do what they review, just be able to critically comment. I can sing a bit. Enough to be paid. Oddly, we have numerous people ask for opinions. They always take comments well - things like the guitar tuning, or the hiss effects, or poor timing or crazily too loud snare. The people commenting don't get their background or own ability queried. This leads me to wonder why you are so blinkered about this particular band. Remember the Greystones? The kids band where the sax players commented his fingers weren't right, or the vocalist pulled the mic away b ut the voice carried on? Stuff like that? Everybody nodded. Everybody agreed - tweaked and twiddled. The guy who mixed it said they'd spent a little time honing, but stopped short of using the word lip sync, the kind version of mimed. Nobody popped up and defended them, yet in this almost identical, clearly post produced collection of music, you are so vocal about the fact that it is clearly us who in this case are wrong. It smells like a social media marketing product to get traction - good looking kids, singing in unusual places. Great social media placement. Trouble is it's fake to a greater or minor degree. The car park is to me, clearly is fake. In your topic I have stopped commenting - it's your topic and I'll leave you there to have your say. This one, however, is about cheating - or even if cheating is somehow nowadays OK. Maybe it is. In fact, I think almost everything we do to a recorded track is cheating in some form - even EQ changes what was captured. So many name artists, who really can sing, cheat. even Celine Dion 'cheated' - all those half time sports events have to cheat. Anything where reality just isn't possible means cheating to get it done. That is good. Cheating at the start of your career seems to me to be bad. Those manufactured bands from the 60's and 70's. Scritty Polliti, Boney-M and others - total fakes. These were an out and out con. Taking a bunch of teens and polishing their output is OK. What isn't OK is pretending it is real and accurate. Fil is able to provide objective evidence of tampering, or miming or editing. If people don;t want this exposure, they shouldn't cheat. I note the people involved never provide any contra-evidence. Who was that guy with a guitar playing course who turned out to be a rubbish guitarist, nicking other people's stuff? Social media works brilliantly building people up to then be destroyed. It's the Emperor's new clothes.

 

[Serendipity Records]

They can sing - not bad, but certainly NOT brilliantly.

I rarely take this point of view but I’ll make the exception--

Bob Dylan would probably have failed singing exams - so would Joe Cocker, Rod Stewart and and the front men of bands like AC/DC - but they are crazily popular and their sound is their hallmark.

They can indeed sing. That is not in question. What I am apparently alone on, is their assessment. Good, not great. Competent, not Callas.

These quotes kinda make the point that "brilliant" singing is far from objective. Just like any type of artistic expression. I used to profoundly dislike hip-hop (and still dislike its modern incarnation -- “rap”) but a couple of years spent in the company of all-in experts on the genre convinced me that it has artistic worth [yet I still categorize it outside of “music”]. I recall watching Sam Hyde (!) speak about this, his take was spot on; I think this is the correct video:



WoP and other similar influencers (unfortunately, I must name Rick Beato among them) are just clickbaiting at this point, and while they are rarely wrong IMO saying the obvious is not a good use of anyone’s time.

 

[brassplyer]

I rarely take this point of view but I’ll make the exception--


These quotes kinda make the point that "brilliant" singing is far from objective. Just like any type of artistic expression. I used to profoundly dislike hip-hop (and still dislike its modern incarnation -- “rap”) but a couple of years spent in the company of all-in experts on the genre convinced me that it has artistic worth [yet I still categorize it outside of “music”]. I recall watching Sam Hyde (!) speak about this, his take was spot on; I think this is the correct video:



WoP and other similar influencers (unfortunately, I must name Rick Beato among them) are just clickbaiting at this point, and while they are rarely wrong IMO saying the obvious is not a good use of anyone’s time.

I'm not a constant viewer of Rick Beato's videos but I've consistently liked the ones I've seen - can you point to a few you think are fluff? He strikes me as extremely knowledgeable and a really solid musician and production guy. Seems like a good guy too. His son has amazing perfect pitch.

FWIW I see that Li3D has *many* individual videos that have more views than all of Fil Henley's WoP videos where he's performing as a musician combined. It seems the internet is more interested in him carping about other people's product than in his music.

 

[Serendipity Records]

I'm not a constant viewer of Rick Beato's videos but I've consistently liked the ones I've seen - can you point to a few you think are fluff?

I would hesitate to characterize them as “fluff”. As I said, “saying the obvious” just to please your cult/following who already know that Stairway to Heaven is the greatest acoustic guitar intro in rock history.



For the record I agree with points brought up by both yourself @brassplyer and @rob aylestone as well.

 

[DrewPeterson7]

I would hesitate to characterize them as “fluff”. As I said, “saying the obvious” just to please your cult/following who already know that Stairway to Heaven is the greatest acoustic guitar intro in rock history.



For the record I agree with points brought up by both yourself @brassplyer and @rob aylestone as well.

I wonder how much of that is just needing to keep publishing something to keep the algorithm happy. Some of those are pretty light, but then again some of his "what makes this song great" videos are inspired - the one on "Smells Like Teen Spirit" where he spends a long time talking about where and when Grohl is pushing downbeats, and Cobain's melodic approach, is excellent, I thought.



The irony is it sounds like he's mis-playing that third chord in the intro, and I still think he's getting that one chord wrong. :lol:

 

[Serendipity Records]

I wonder how much of that is just needing to keep publishing something to keep the algorithm happy. Some of those are pretty light, but then again some of his "what makes this song great" videos are inspired - the one on "Smells Like Teen Spirit" where he spends a long time talking about where and when Grohl is pushing downbeats, and Cobain's melodic approach, is excellent, I thought.



The irony is it sounds like he's mis-playing that third chord in the intro, and I still think he's getting that one chord wrong. :lol:

Don’t get me wrong, I love Rick. Good point re:algorithm work

 

[DrewPeterson7]

Don’t get me wrong, I love Rick. Good point re:algorithm work

Yeah, I got that from your post. I just thought it was also far to balance what was pretty objectively a "churn out something to keep the algorithm happy" on par with a Rolling Stone Top 100 (clickbait, basically), with an example of some of his much more sophisticated analysis, where I think there's a real value add at play. I didn't think you were just slagging off on him in general, though, just his occasional fairly lightweight content that he also probably didn't think much of.

 

[RFR]

The machine needs to eat. What is its food? Content.

Same as with a forum, this, or any other forum. It needs content. So you’ll get the occasional (or not so occasional) stupid posts. Mine included.