Never should have told my client about Auto-Tune

[herodotus]

Its gonna make you throw up.
Its on my website on the media page. It's the "Popsonic" link.
I warn you though, it sucks!
However it was a thousand times worse.
The drummer beat ALL the drums out of tune in three hits each. He was completely out of control. total edit job.:ar15:
The bassist had great tone but no melody line AT ALL, snore, I wrote one and put it on it. The singer couldn't sing the song he wrote in the key it is in, 45 minutes of coaching.
This is the band that ACTUALLY said:
"Wow! This is what people had to do before protools, they actually had to know how to sing!?!"
I swallowed my own vomit.

You know, when I started to engage in this thread, I thought you were doing the generalized 'music sucks and it was better back in the 70's' sort of rant that I have seen so many times here. And while I generally agree with that sentiment (being 40 years old and professionally trained), I think it does get way overblown around here (Let us not forget 70's 'classics' like 'Itsy bitsy teeny weeny yellow polka dot bikini' and 'yummy yummy yummy I've got love in my tummy' in our nostalgia).

But in any case, I forgot how bad shit really can get, and that you have to deal with that sort of thing daily in your business.

My apologies. That song is just dreadful.

[Brian]

I recorded some other stuff for them years earlier, sometimes they come back again, and its better, but not by much. I remember having to buy a "gentler toothpaste" back then.

[joel hamilton]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Oct30.html

The last line is the most important in my opinion.

[Brian]

I actually read that article and thought, "Joel is right on target again".

[evan]

I think it's weird that people seem to refer to recording as a hands-off documentary form so frequently and exclusively. We all know recording is not a transparent act -- every step in the signal chain alters the original performance. Why should autotune change anything? How is it qualitatively different than EQ'ing out low frequencies, or compressing a dynamic singer? In either case, you're working to create an idealized listening experience that never actually existed.

A recording is an object separate from the performance. While capturing the sound as straight-forwardly as possible might be most appropriate way to go for one musician, there really shouldn't be any distress over tweaking it. Nobody gets on Brian Eno for using the studio to meet his artistic goals, even though he has openly admitted to being a poor musician. (For some of Eno's views on recorded music, read his lecture "The Studio As A Compositional Tool".)

[gregnrom]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Oct30.html

The last line is the most important in my opinion.

"There's nothing that re-creates a passionate performance," Hamilton says. "You have to sound like you mean it."

Huh?
What part is the passion? Is it the legs, jeans or the dancing? Is the dude hitting play on the CD player doing it with gusto, and that makes the show?
Does sounding like you "mean it" refer to not sounding like anything at all (since there is no one performing really)?
I'm sure I don't understand.

[Brian]

I think it's weird that people seem to refer to recording as a hands-off documentary form so frequently and exclusively. We all know recording is not a transparent act -- every step in the signal chain alters the original performance. Why should autotune change anything? How is it qualitatively different than EQ'ing out low frequencies, or compressing a dynamic singer? In either case, you're working to create an idealized listening experience that never actually existed.

A recording is an object separate from the performance. While capturing the sound as straight-forwardly as possible might be most appropriate way to go for one musician, there really shouldn't be any distress over tweaking it. Nobody gets on Brian Eno for using the studio to meet his artistic goals, even though he has openly admitted to being a poor musician. (For some of Eno's views on recorded music, read his lecture "The Studio As A Compositional Tool".)

Now doubt you can do anything you want, boy George dressed as an androgenous, uh, uh, uh, well whatever, if that's your bag. You can do whatever you want if you end up looking like an idiot for getting caught faking it so what? Isn't that where forgiveness comes in? I mean, rag on Cher all you want for overdoing it and being obvious, but, she wasn't pretending to be anything she wasn't. Hell she was making hits long before autotune came along.
Phil Collins used a drum machine, but, he didn't pretend he wasn't using one, he made it very obvious on purpose. Of course he played with the Beatles, Brand X, and Genesis.
Eno made his name a long time ago doing things on purpose that were very contrived and experimental and he made that known from the start.
Is it a really wonder to you or anyone else that when Meatloaf got caught lipsynching during a show "the public audience" right in front of him shut the show down, Teddy Riley faking fainting when the backing tracks on DAT started running in FF during a Guy concert, Ashley Simpson, need I say more?
No one is saying that you should engineer like a documentarian ALL the time, but, you shouldn't help support some hack to try and fool "its" audience into believing anything other than what is. Why?
Because doing that will not serve "its" career when the shit hits the fan and in the long run that will come back on you.
This ain't Hollywood and there need be no "suspension of reality" here.
You'll know when it's Hollywood, you won't even be asked if you have tools with which to fake by, it'll be expected.
Mixing Hollywood wioth the music biz only works out for Hollywood. We in the music biz have to deal with the aftermath, so, please, don't make anymore aftermath for me or yourself.

[Brian]

Why should autotune change anything? How is it qualitatively different than EQ'ing out low frequencies, or compressing a dynamic singer? In either case, you're working to create an idealized listening experience that never actually existed.

Sometimes the performance did exist and the gear made it otherwise and so you have to adjust the gear to make it get out of the way. That has nothing to do with supporting a hack talent usually.

[Mark Alan Miller]

Brian, do you have potential clients submit demo tapes before they work with you (and decline if you think they will cause negative 'aftermath' if you work with them,) or kick them out of your studio if you decide they're 'hacks'?
I ask sincerely, as that's the bottom line you seem to be drawing, and I'm a little facinated.

[evan]

Now doubt you can do anything you want, boy George dressed as an androgenous, uh, uh, uh, well whatever, if that's your bag. You can do whatever you want if you end up looking like an idiot for getting caught faking it so what? Isn't that where forgiveness comes in? I mean, rag on Cher all you want for overdoing it and being obvious, but, she wasn't pretending to be anything she wasn't. Hell she was making hits long before autotune came along.
Phil Collins used a drum machine, but, he didn't pretend he wasn't using one, he made it very obvious on purpose. Of course he played with the Beatles, Brand X, and Genesis.
Eno made his name a long time ago doing things on purpose that were very contrived and experimental and he made that known from the start.

...No one is saying that you should engineer like a documentarian ALL the time, but, you shouldn't help support some hack to try and fool "its" audience into believing anything other than what is. Why?

...This ain't Hollywood and there need be no "suspension of reality" here.

This kind of thinking seems a bit backwards to me, from an engineer's standpoint -- not stupid, but literally out-of-order. I don't think it's necessary for any musician, of artistic merit or not, to qualify what they do in the studio. They should be able to find whatever it is they seek in making a record -- the engineer or producer's purpose is to translate the artist's intent into a recording, not dictate how the artist should accomplish it.

Think of VU's White Light/White Heat, which was completely pummelled to tape, despite the engineer's insistence to turn everything down. It's a funny comparison to make, between VU and a possibly talentless autotuned singer, but it's valid in the sense that, when it comes down to it, the engineer is there to act on behalf of the artist, even if it's against their personal opinions. Of course you can offer your view on the situation ("how about trying that take again?"), but working against their goals, even if you judge it a poor aesthetic decision, seems counterproductive to me.

Whether the entire musical endeavor is artistically worthwhile is a completely separate judgement from 'how will I accomplish such-and-such effect'. If you want that to influence your ability to do your job as an engineer, that's a personal decision.

(My main beef with the anti-autotune, pro-documentarian attitude has nothing to do with defending boring, cringeworthy music, but that it's more broadly set against the artist trying out new ideas in a studio. I wouldn't want an engineer to tell me, "you can't do that, because it's in bad taste".)

[Brian]

Now doubt you can do anything you want, boy George dressed as an androgenous, uh, uh, uh, well whatever, if that's your bag. You can do whatever you want if you end up looking like an idiot for getting caught faking it so what? Isn't that where forgiveness comes in? I mean, rag on Cher all you want for overdoing it and being obvious, but, she wasn't pretending to be anything she wasn't. Hell she was making hits long before autotune came along.
Phil Collins used a drum machine, but, he didn't pretend he wasn't using one, he made it very obvious on purpose. Of course he played with the Beatles, Brand X, and Genesis.
Eno made his name a long time ago doing things on purpose that were very contrived and experimental and he made that known from the start.

...No one is saying that you should engineer like a documentarian ALL the time, but, you shouldn't help support some hack to try and fool "its" audience into believing anything other than what is. Why?

...This ain't Hollywood and there need be no "suspension of reality" here.

This kind of thinking seems a bit backwards to me, from an engineer's standpoint -- not stupid, but literally out-of-order. I don't think it's necessary for any musician, of artistic merit or not, to qualify what they do in the studio. They should be able to find whatever it is they seek in making a record -- the engineer or producer's purpose is to translate the artist's intent into a recording, not dictate how the artist should accomplish it.

That's an engineer that was not sought out for their ability or style documented by their projects, unless, that is their style.

Think of VU's White Light/White Heat, which was completely pummelled to tape, despite the engineer's insistence to turn everything down. It's a funny comparison to make, between VU and a possibly talentless autotuned singer, but it's valid in the sense that, when it comes down to it, the engineer is there to act on behalf of the artist, even if it's against their personal opinions. Of course you can offer your view on the situation ("how about trying that take again?"), but working against their goals, even if you judge it a poor aesthetic decision, seems counterproductive to me.

Surely you know this is nothing more or less than a tool for the untalented.
Use of such tools should be for the bedroom until one learns to sing, like a woodshed. Stingy "artists" (read: hacks) don't hire a really great vocalist when they can't sing. If you can't sing and you use that tool, clearly, you are trying to convey that you can and that your content would be better rendered by a talented vocalist.
Trower hired Dewar to sing.

Whether the entire musical endeavor is artistically worthwhile is a completely separate judgement from 'how will I accomplish such-and-such effect'. If you want that to influence your ability to do your job as an engineer, that's a personal decision.

(My main beef with the anti-autotune, pro-documentarian attitude has nothing to do with defending boring, cringeworthy music, but that it's more broadly set against the artist trying out new ideas in a studio. I wouldn't want an engineer to tell me, "you can't do that, because it's in bad taste".)

I'm not against new ideas and you can use any tool you want, but, I don't think that this particular crutch is worth bothering with.

[Brian]

Furthermore, ha ha ha Let crackheads like Whitney and Bobby use that kind of junk as a crutch.

[Mark Alan Miller]

So, if an artist truly believes they're 'competent' (by their own definitions), and you discover/uncover they're not (by your own definitions), you let 'em know it? Do you cease working with them immediately (or refuse to outright if you discovered/uncovered the 'truth' early enough?)? If so, do you refund their money? Destroy the masters?

I really am facinated by your arguments. Sincerely. But less and less I find them compelling - and increasingly morally absolutist. Hm.

[chris harris]

stop going round and round with this guy!!! good god.
look at his website.
his glory days are long behind him. though he mentions several legendary artists that he "engineered" for in the 80's, there are no specific album credits given.

and, the current work he's doing doesn't justify the elitist attitude he displays here.

I don't have the credits to talk down to an entire community of recordists. so, I don't.

this is just sad.

please stop.

[Brian]

stop going round and round with this guy!!! good god.
look at his website.
his glory days are long behind him. though he mentions several legendary artists that he "engineered" for in the 80's, there are no specific album credits given.

and, the current work he's doing doesn't justify the elitist attitude he displays here.

I don't have the credits to talk down to an entire community of recordists. so, I don't.

this is just sad.

please stop.

YOU don't speak for a whole community of recordists and niether do I. Most of my work is done live and largescale live sound, not albums including the "glory days".
I recently recorded both of Johnny Cash's original bands with all the members except for Johnny, did you?
What's sad is that you are getting defensive when no one is launching an attack. You mix your way and I'll mix mine, speaking of which, i have to go mix right now, so you can stop prarie doggin and duck back in your cubicle, jr.
I wish I could talk like that but it isn't really meant. You have your style and I have mine, it's ok. In the long run Antares will go out of biz. A real experiment is to listen to a mix you've done with it and then go take it off everything and listen again. Its a shocker.