macle
New member
hey Wes, while I was writing my book report, you were writing yours! I'm gonna have to comment later, I'll be back...
Macle
hey Wes, while I was writing my book report, you were writing yours! I'm gonna have to comment later, I'll be back...
I've recorded a LOT of doubled/layered vocals and It's easy to tell the difference between auto tune and someone who can sing indentical multiple takes....layered vocals are smooth when they are this tight!
j/k
Kramer said:...very much WATYF?
Kramer
a modified dog said:
What's WATYF?
held hostage at a presbytary,
Gorilla Monsoon
He's a poster here.


) I don't really know much of what I'm doing when it comes to recording... so I don't mind getting an "autotune" sound mixed up with a "doubled vocal" sound (or a "chorus" sound or a "compressed" sound)... Either way, it sounded too "artificial" to me, and that was something I didn't notice aboot his other stuff, therefore I wanted to mention it, since I saw it as being a step backwards in vocal technique.
WATYF said:I wasn't aware that saying something sounds "autotune-ish" was akin to calling someone's mother a whore.. I'll try to keep that in mind for next time..![]()
WATYF

You obviously haven't heard me sing...Kramer said:p.s. You could sing the same thing twice watyf...you just have to do a lot of punching in and out doing pieces at a time until you get the second vocal to match the first....it just takes time and patience......you dont have to sing a second vocal straight through each time.......take it verse by verse line by line.![]()

Just to be clear, I never said that I never use Autotune *gasp* (Kramer leaves to go delete his illegal Macle sites.
) I've admitted it here before, so it's no big news. But, I don't think this is what WATYF is hearing because he would be hearing it on Despair as well. I'm not saying I like Autotune, and it's better to not have to use it, but it comes in handy when something's out of tune
, so I'm not gonna not use it just to be a purist. In that case, no multiple takes, no punching, no comping, no layering, no editing, no EQ, no reverb, no delay, no compression, no nothing, which would eliminate pretty much all the great pop records as well as the shitty ones. I think there are a lot worse things then using Autotune, and in trying to compete with "real" recordings. in which they've got every advantage and then some, I'm gonna do what I can recording at home. WATYF, you could very well be right that this artificialness you're hearing is something that shouldn't be there or could be improved by a pro who knew what they were doing, but I have to say that I hear a lot of pro songs that sound really artificial, from obvious vocal tuning to just an all around artificial sound. I appreciate your feedback on this, as well as others who mentioned it. So, anyway, I hope you don't think I'm a whore, but if I am, I am a stupid one, cuz I keep giving it away for free. 
Too bad you aren't an A&R guy. You're pretty much right on, and I love the phrase "intentional cheese". Maybe that should be the title. Er, maybe not. One thing, as far as the musical identity, I know sometimes I make comments about that, like negative ones about this song, for example, but it's really just certain aspects, things that I personally don't like, or would have like to have changed. The general overall musical identity is pretty much right and good to me, and to me, was the best way of making the two of us work (since we really are different in a lot of ways, musically). So, it's really great that you get it and think it's working, makes me feel good, cuz I had to go to hell and back to do it this way, as opposed to the road it was gonna go down. Kramer said:
Look at the top of this page and you'll see.
He's a poster here.
Read the whole thread and you'll see him.