lurking cloak deactivated

transducr wrote:

even using the medium itself as an instrument
(stockhausen, etc.)

10cc, "I'm Not In Love"!!!

i don't think that's a bad thing. in fact, the ability to use
technology in a musical fashion is one of the things that excites me
most about the artform.

100% Agreed.

Myke

lurking cloak reactivated

--

-================================-
Windows...It's rebootylicious!!!
-================================-

In article ,
(transducr) wrote:

it's annoying, but people even exploit auto-tune in a (i hesitate to
say) creative fashion beyond it's original purpose.

Speaking of which...

Has anyone heard the vocal ending of the new Audioslave single?

It's got some kind of Cher-esque ****ing about on it, but I have to
admit that it sounds cool as hell. Almost Eastern....


CT

Scott wrote:

True... and the whole time, you are playing an instrument that is
conveniently "autotuned" for you.


Hey, let's not idealize this situation. Most of the times, it means
playing an instrument that's out of tune, and not being able to do
anything about it. Even a lot of sampled pianos aren't in tune.


Chris

"Ty Ford" wrote in message
...

In the V/O industry as well, there was a line that separated the
amateurs from the pros. [...] With digital editing, a LOT more people
lesser talented can get work


The lesser talented can get work -- once. Just long enough for the
producer to appreciate the pro that wasn't there that day.

Editing can correct outright screwups, but it can't add inflection or
make a voice sound like something it ain't.

VO work is acting, and talent still shows.

--
"I got into audio because I like pushing buttons...
...never figured on all this freakin' wire!"
- Lorin David Schultz

As a software-Autotune user, I make it a point to almost always use
graphical mode... and avoid "auto" mode.

This ensures that, if you know what you are doing, the result is natural.

-S

"Brian King" wrote in message
...
On 02 Jul 2003 05:40:02 GMT, (Fill X) wrote:

It's a strange world, not even considering blue notes or "wrong notes"
from
singers, think about how certain bop horn players play a bit sharp on
purpose
for the edge is gives. At any rate, um, whatever works, works. I just
dont
think most of us subconciously like the sound of auto tune.

P h i l i p

I have a love-hate relationship with autotune. My band has our own
studio and an Antares. When we first got it I hated it-- it made
everything sound unnatural and robotic, and also introduced occasional
glitches and pops into the track. But we experimented with it for
many hours, trying many varieties of settings, and got experienced
enough with it to use it almost all the time, without hearing a hint
of unnaturalness, even on a soloed track.

The key is that you cannot pick a single group of settings on the
thing and run all your tracks through it blindly, and you also have to
start out with a pretty good performance. We would record a track
from beginning to end, aiming for 90% of what we wanted in terms of
pitch, and 100% in terms of timing and emotional delivery. Then we
could use the Antares to bring us up near 100% in the pitch
department. We'd have to listen to the soloed track in sections
sometimes, experimenting and changing settings on the unit, and
re-recording the output onto a new track. And each of the band's
three singers required a slightly different approach. Then we
listened to the results with all the instruments to make very sure it
sounded natural.

Fortunately we have our own studio and can afford the time to get it
right, but given a choice between what seems to be the normal method
of set-it-and-forget-it autotuning and not using it at all, I'd rather
go without. Listening to a song on the radio that has obvious
autotuning artifacts in a non-artistic, unintentional context destroys
the appeal of the song to me.

Brian
Lord Only