Fruitonica

It still has no bearing on song writing talent, I mean, half the people I know could sing well enough to front a band - it doesn't mean they are.

The Unfan

But it doesn't matter. The end result is music, an artistic expression. That is it. We're talking about sound, and as long as the sound is pleasing to the ear why would it matter how it was achieved?

Antonio

i agree^, it's like if someone wants to make a song in a way where it's not possible without the aid of studio equipment, i'd be okay with that if the end result was creatively sound and something that i enjoyed listening to. one example that comes to mind is Mastodon. while they can be able to replicate the instrumentation of their songs good enough live, their vocals (especially on their newer release Crack The Skye) are alot more polished in the studio than live. tbh, i feel that as long as they're able to make fantastic songs like i know they can, i don't care if they never perform another live show again.

__________________
Been making some new music lately, check it out

My MB Journal-I talk about music and stuff!

add me on Steam!
http://steamcommunity.com/id/commandercool

The Abominable Homan

I know, the thought of having more good music out there made by someone "unworthy" is horrifying.

__________________
Rate Your Musics

Ace

Why don't you guys just start going to concerts where the bands sit in lounge chairs and play their CD's through the sound system then?

The argument here isn't about music in general, its about having someone clearly faking their performance. But hey, if you want to spend money on that, its your call.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by RezZ I think I know much better than you ever will how Mettalica is. I used to play for 2 years in a Mettalica cover band.

The Unfan

You can't fake a performance. You can use autotune in a performance, but that is just a stylistic choice.

Ace

Haha. Whatever dude. It almost seems like you know someone or are someone who uses it, the way you're going about defending it.

Like I said, if you want to spend money on something that isn't genuine, you do that.
I'm not going to pay to see a singer use a device to help him sound better, because he really can't cut it by himself. And that's all it is.

When auto-tune is used for that purpose, its because the singer can't cut it.
Plain and simple, like it or not, defend it all you want.

I could almost guarantee I could use it and start making a crapload of cash, but as I said in one of my earlier posts, I prefer my music to be real.
Making music using studio devices is one thing.
Using the studio to cover up your mistakes, is another.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by RezZ I think I know much better than you ever will how Mettalica is. I used to play for 2 years in a Mettalica cover band.

The Abominable Homan

The Unfan has it right there, but to just go about this a different way...

You're saying that in the studio and in creating music, it's fine to use autotune? But then those same artists need to not use it live, and it would be better to pay to go to concerts where the vocalist gives a terrible performance and is never on pitch?

I don't see how the singer's technical ability is possibly more important than deriving enjoyment from the sound of the music. Regardless of how it was made, what's important is if it sounds good or not.

__________________
Rate Your Musics

Ace

I've already said I could justify using auto-tune in the studio, IF the artist is capable of replicating the performance.
Maybe not every single day, but atleast capable of reaching that peak, unaided, and live.

But no, I really could never bring myself to listen to someone who was using auto-tune live, and really enjoy it.
You can be lazy with it. All you have to do is get close, and the device would correct the note for you.

Seriously, imagine the same thing with your instruments.
Would you prefer a guitarist to have a device attatched to his guitar, that made all the right notes play?
(Don't be a smartass, even though a lot of bands should have this =|)
That way, all the guitarist had to do was pretend he was playing! Oh joy!

Music is different from movies, there should be no acting involved.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by RezZ I think I know much better than you ever will how Mettalica is. I used to play for 2 years in a Mettalica cover band.

The Unfan

No. I know some people who work in studios, and a few musicians, but none who openly use it. That is to say, the might, but if they did I wouldn't know. I'm defending it because I think its legit.

Using autotune doesn't make something not genuine. Rather it is a means to reach a genuine artistic expression that wouldn't be achieved otherwise.
So you're never going to a concert where someone sings ever? Mixers can adjust how much treble or bass is in a voice which can actually significantly change how a singer sounds. Most microphones have covers to dampen plosive noises.

No it isn't. However, just for the sake argument let's assume you're right. So what? Who cares? The performance is what matters, and if using autotune enhances the performance why is that a bad thing?

It isn't a mistake if you intended to use autotune to fix your voice in the first place.

Edit: Acting is fine in music though. It is all art. What about Alice Cooper? Acting improved his stage presence considerably.