Auto-tune destroying Popular Music?

[Chipotle]

Let's not turn this thread into a Beato bashing session, that wasn't my intent. I enjoy some of his videos. The point was that--like many of us--he's inconsistent and maybe a bit hypocritical on some things. He doesn't like auto-tune to to make things sound better in the studio that the singer (maybe) can't do without assistance, but he's fine with live backing tracks to make things sound better on stage that the band (maybe) can't do without assistance. His prerogative.

We are all inconsistent and a bit hypocritical about *something*. "Do I contradict myself? Very well then I contradict myself, (I am large, I contain multitudes.)" --Walt Whitman

On the original topic, I also seethe at using electronic trickery to give someone the illusion of competence, when they're not. But I have no problem "sweetening up" my recordings with a bit of judicious auto-tune if needed on an otherwise great take, or comping a bunch of takes together, or whatever. And in the end, the difference is only degree. Where's the line? I dunno.

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by Chipotle

Where's the line? I dunno.

Where I draw it.

[Glennwillow]

During the pandemic I was working for quite a stretch of time volunteering to help a local church with putting together remote services which included readings and music as well as a sermon from the minister. I received piano accompaniment from the music director and vocals to go with that accompaniment from the choir director and soloist.

The vocals I received from the soloist were almost always last-minute submissions sent to me the night before the deadline, and because she did not take a lot of time with these recordings, they were invariably off pitch. She had a full time job and a family to take care of, so I understood why this stuff was so last-minute.

I routinely pitch corrected her vocals to make her sound better, added a little reverb, and also sweetened her vocals with Izotope Nectar to take some of the treble edge off her voice. She was happy, the church was happy, the church members were happy. I felt like I was helping out. I didn't feel like I was undermining the recording world.

- Glenn

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by Brent Hahn

Rick Beato's entitled to like what he likes, and he's entitled to complain that he was "on the bubble" and The Label shafted him, and he's entitled to turn everything into a music theory lesson, and wish that we were still in that tiny historical blip where one song could make you rich and famous. That last thing -- an awful lot of us wish that.

He gets major props from me for being able to turn that stew of talent and experience and bitterness into a Youtube channel that makes him a living.

While I have enjoyed a few of his "why this song is great" video's
I agree and would add ,, Beato's is pretty skilled at click bait, playing to and exploiting people angst for profit, and I have found many of his video's to get tedious fairly quickly

In answer to the OP questions
No auto tune is not "destroying" popular music
No it is not a "threat"
No AI will not "replace" musicians and songwriters

Tools are what we make of them,,, not the other way around
And fear of change is both futile and stifling

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by KevWind

While I have enjoyed a few of his "why this song is great" video's
I agree and would add ,, Beato's is pretty skilled at click bait, playing to and exploiting people angst for profit, and I have found many of his video's to get tedious fairly quickly

In answer to the OP questions
No auto tune is not "destroying" popular music
No it is not a "threat"
No AI will not "replace" musicians and songwriters

Tools are what we make of them,,, not the other way around
And fear of change is both futile and stifling

You're probably right. After all, the motor car didn't replace the horse. Horses still exist! People still ride them!


But then motor vehicles certainly did "replace" all the common modes of 19th century transport. If you were someone who made horse-drawn coaches and wagons, or saddles and bridles, or owned stables, or worked as a groom, you would have been right to fear for your future employment.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by JonPR

You're probably right. After all, the motor car didn't replace the horse. Horses still exist! People still ride them!


But then motor vehicles certainly did "replace" all the common modes of 19th century transport. If you were someone who made horse-drawn coaches and wagons, or saddles and bridles, or owned stables, or worked as a groom, you would have been right to fear for your future employment.

True but music is not transportation

And I suppose it really depends on ones definition of "fear"... To me, fear is primal and can lead to debilitating inaction or ill thought out gut reaction..
To my mind being aware of possible danger and or concern with how change may effect you is one thing, and can indeed help with coping with change and positive action . After all some Carriage houses and bike makers became fairly successful auto builders some didn't

However being fearful ( in my mind) often leads to bad choices and or inhibits or limits ability to reason and progress and positive action . YMMV

I survived 20 years of hunting mostly solo in the Wyoming wilderness and it was based being aware, not on fear..
And speaking of horses circa 1983,, a solo hunt (interestingly with a replica circa 1820-40's Hawken Muzzleloader ) Think Revenant

I would gladly accept a little auto-tune if anyone offered it to me. I decided to start recording myself practicing this afternoon, so I turned on the voice recorder on my cell phone and started playing and singing. OMG, when I played it back, I sound TERRIBLE!!! My only hope that is in real life, I might sound just a teeny bit less awful, but still. What a motivator! If I could ever sound even just not horrible w/out auto-tune, I'd be thrilled. Auto-tune would be like a gift from heaven.

Just sayin'...

[Mandobart]

Originally Posted by JonPR

You're probably right. After all, the motor car didn't replace the horse. Horses still exist! People still ride them!


But then motor vehicles certainly did "replace" all the common modes of 19th century transport. If you were someone who made horse-drawn coaches and wagons, or saddles and bridles, or owned stables, or worked as a groom, you would have been right to fear for your future employment.

Technology has affected music just as much as every other industry. There are scholarly books on the subject. Prior to recorded music there was one or more working bands in nearly every community across the US (I would bet other countries as well).

If you wanted music for a party, play, movie, wedding, etc. you had to hire a musician (or a few musicians). Trained musicians were on par socially and economically with the other skilled trades.

Then came wax cylinders, acetate, but most importantly RADIO. The ability to record, preserve, replay and broadcast music absolutely began to put live musicians out of work, and still does. The microphone, pickup, amplifier, etc. led to changes in how music was performed and what was considered music (and what was not).

This is, of course, continuing today. It's an oversimplification to say "autotune did this." ALL technology has helped bring about the changes that some like and others don't.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by Mandobart

ALL technology has helped bring about the changes that some like and others don't.

Exactly. You just have to make sure you don't have too much invested in the old stuff.

I started watching a fabulous documentary last night on Amazon Prime called "Laurel Canyon." Anyone who is mourning for David Crosby should definitely watch it! He figures prominently in the film.

There is a lot of footage of live performances of the various groups, but the one that made me want to post on this thread was the Mamas and Papas. I would SWEAR they were singing "California Dreaming" off key. Also, some of the performances they showed at the Monterey Pop Festival sounded like they were off key to me.

It could be just poor quality recordings. It could be me, like my ears don't work right any more. Or, it could be that they did not have the benefit of auto-tune. Or some combination of the above.

Also, these performances were not recorded digitally, so that could affect the sound. We may be so accustomed now to the way things sound when they are digitally recorded, that these old recordings sound "off."

Am I crazy?

One of the main narrators for the film is a musician and photographer who lived and worked in Laurel Canyon at that time, in the 60s, and there are many shots of him being interviewed in his studio. He's got an entire WALL of vinyl record albums that is making me drool.

I got rid of all my vinyl a long time ago (I moved around like a gypsy when I was in my 20s and I finally got tired of schlepping those heavy boxes), but kind of wish I hadn't. But I wonder, if I still had my old albums, would I listen to them?

If you still have a vinyl record collection, do you listen to it regularly?

[Mandobart]

Originally Posted by janinep7

I got rid of all my vinyl a long time ago (I moved around like a gypsy when I was in my 20s and I finally got tired of schlepping those heavy boxes), but kind of wish I hadn't. But I wonder, if I still had my old albums, would I listen to them?

If you still have a vinyl record collection, do you listen to it regularly?

I did schlepp all my albums (600 or more, AND kept adding to them) in my 20's (1980's). I still have them. Honestly, no I don't listen to them. I'm slowly converting them to .WAV files using a bunch of cables, my old stereo, a Presonus audio interface and Audacity. It's a LOT easier and quicker to just buy CD's or digital downloads.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by janinep7

If you still have a vinyl record collection, do you listen to it regularly?

No. It's just too much hassle to go over to the shelves, pull out an album, blow the dust off the record deck, take the disc out of its sleeve, place it carefully on the turntable and the stylus carefully on the record. And do the whole process in reverse afterwards. Why do all that, when - with a couple of clicks without moving from my desk, in a second or two, I can call up the track online on youtube, or spotify. I rarely want to listen to a whole track anyway.

But I'm an instinctive hoarder, and can't (yet) bear to part with the collection. I started buying records 60 years ago, stopped around 25-30 years ago, and still have almost every record I ever bought (singles as well as albums). The only ones I've ever sold are a couple I bought by mistake in the first place (the cover promised what the music didn't deliver...) I did buy a few CDs in the 80s/90s, but that stopped as soon as music became easy to access online.

The thing is, I'm not one of those audio aficionados who sits down and listens to top quality recordings on expensive hi-fi (and who actually enjoys that ritual of taking the record from its sleeve and putting it on...). I do give it my full attention when I listen (I can't have music on as background to anything else), but music for me is something I'd much rather be actively involved in than passively consuming.

I mean, I do understand the appeal of the vinyl ritual - as well as the argument about analog v. digital. Those fine details are just not that important to me.

[marciero]

Originally Posted by janinep7

There is a lot of footage of live performances of the various groups, but the one that made me want to post on this thread was the Mamas and Papas. I would SWEAR they were singing "California Dreaming" off key. Also, some of the performances they showed at the Monterey Pop Festival sounded like they were off key to me.

A very real possibility is poor monitor quality-they could not hear themselves.

[marciero]

Speaking of vinyl vs digital - I like the convenience of having things cloud based and streamed, which means compressed. But it makes me sad that a LOT of the original masters for artists we love were lost in that Universal music fire a while back.

[SongwriterFan]

Originally Posted by marciero

A very real possibility is poor monitor quality-they could not hear themselves.

The "could not hear themselves" is a very real thing in harmonies, in my experience. I used to follow a band (dad, daughter, son trio) that had great harmonies . . but on several awards type shows they didn't do very well at all. But they also didn't have their usual sound guy helping them out. I can't help but think that it was because of not being able to hear themselves well.