vocal effect

  • Thread starter Thread starter dmstilo
  • Start date Start date
D

dmstilo

New member
Does anyone know what processors can make your vocal sound robotic or have that "Cher" effect. If so, is it available in a software program rather than an external rack?
 
The "Cher" effect is done with a pitch corrector. I don't know what type she used, but I think the Antares Vocal Producer is supposed to be able to do that. Antares makes lots of plug-ins so I imagine your chances are pretty good.

Chaz
 
At least that was the popular myth on the street. I read an interview with either the engineer or producer of "If you believe" some time ago where he said they did NOT uses Autotune to get that effect, but something else altogether different. Problem is, I've forgotten what they said they actually used!:(
 
dmstilo said:
Does anyone know what processors can make your vocal sound robotic or have that "Cher" effect. If so, is it available in a software program rather than an external rack?
Click to expand...

Use the "search" function in the upper right corner.

This has been asked and answered a thousand times already!

(....this makes it 1,001 times!)
 
I believe it was a Digitech Talker (which apparently uses a pitch-correcting algorithm, and would be some sort of crossover between a vocoder and a pitch-corrector?), triggered by a MIDI keyboard. It's to be read in an article which is linked in a thread around here. So, yeah, search.
 
Buck62 isn't being anything.....he's merely directing dmstilo to the right place

This question has been asked a thousand times, and the answers the same everytime


The real question is- after so much auto-tune abuse, why would anyone WANT this effect anymore
 
After reading the above mentioned Sound On Sound artical, I'm a bit curious. They say that everything was recorded into Cubase VST with a G3 Mac except for the vocals,which were recorded onto 3 DA88s and then transferred to Cubase.

1. Why track it to the Tascams in the first place? Security? Converters?

2. Does anyone else hear that many tracks of vocals (24)?

I've got to say something about being bold. They took a big chance with that song and all of it's effects. In listening to it just now, it would have been very very easy to screw the whole thing up. There's so much compression in there,a lot of it is just on the brink of pumping. And imagine, all of it done with gear even my poor arse could afford. I've never been a big fan of Cher or dance music, but I am a big fan of people who use what they've got in new and interesting ways. So interesting, in fact, that shortly after that song, everyone tried the vocoder trick with mostly poor results.
 
I remember reading somewhere they worked on processing her vocals for a year to get the effect just right.

Sheesh, I think I'm being anal when I spend all day mixing a song.
 
i know this has been talked about a million times,

but i just dont believe that it is a vocoder doing that. no matter what the engineer is claiming. certainly not the digitech talker. i own one of those and i have no idea how to get it to sound like that. but i can get pretty close with autotune in about a second.

here is the scenario as i imagine it...

engineer fixing pitch problems on chorus, when cher get to the "believe" line she keeps blowing it. he whips out the autotune, accidently sets it to square wave and voila! there is the effect. he thinks it is cool and it gets on the record.

then later, not wanting to admit he autotuned the crap out of the cher song, and also trying to cover his tracks for his new secret sound, he claims he used a digitech talker....
 
It's no vocoder, and it's not autotune (but you can get very close with it)

Its a talk box.....with a Nord Lead II

and alot of careful work


One year is a heck of a long time...
 
i've heard two different stories about this. Both involve some sort of pitch correcting effect.

1. When tracking, the engineer set the scale to the wrong notes in the pitch correcter, so when cher hit that note, it oscillated between the two adjacent ones.

2. Cher just couldn't hit that note, and that effect was the result of it.

both stories end with everyone deciding that even though it was a mistake, it sounded really cool.

and thats how they came up with one of the most annoying and overused effects today! whoo!
 
Some of the best moments in recording history came out of mistakes.

Anyway, is Autotune what they use in the Faith Hill tune "the way you love me"?
 
I don't know what it is but, I have got very similar sounds out of auto tune (with very heavy/tight settings).


F.S.
 
The RBC VoiceTweaker is another AutoTune type effect that is much cheaper, if anybody is interested.
However, I agree that this effect is dreadful, and dreadfully overused. Even on albums where it is just used for pitch correction it is still glaringly obvious to my ears. Just listen to the last Sugar Ray album.....

Aaron
http://www.voodoovibe.com
 
Man, I just want the effect in 1 line in one of my songs. Gotta be a freebie plugin that will work. And, yes I agree...it really leaps out at you in a song. I can pick it up right away. Never could get all the way through that damn Cher song....hehe. Even when just used for pitch correction....it's bad. Guess the only other thing to do would be sign bands that can sing...hehe.
 
Then you should really check out the RBC VoiceTweaker. The demo is fully functional for 30 days I think. Enough time to get one track taken care of.
It's probably close enough to the Cher thing to work for 1 line in one song.

Aaron
http://www.voodoovibe.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top