The Problem With Auto-Tune
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 ноя 2024
- This one takes a weird left turn at Singin' in the Rain
Twitter: / sideways440
Twitch: / sideways440
Patreon: / sideways440
Sources and other links:
Musical Theater Mash's video on Dubbing in Movie Musicals
He has a really great channel, you should absolutely go and follow him
• Dubbing in Movie Musicals
The live pitch correction plugin I showed the commercial for
• Introducing Waves Tune...
Luke Evans's interview about singing live in Beauty and the Beast
collider.com/b...
Emma Watson's interview where she talks about singing live in front of 300 people
www.mtv.com/new...
The Interview with Frank Wolf about mixing Beauty and the Beast
www.soundonsou...
The ClassicalFM article about Emma Watson's singing
www.classicfm....
The Times of San Diego about how we should bring back dubbing citing Watson as a reason
timesofsandieg...
"Everyone gets pitch corrected - *everyone*"
_listens more intensely to Sideways' voice to try and tell if he pitch corrected his own video_
This makes me have trust issues
He doesn't sound bad so yeah, there's almost certainly some audio engineering. Probably just filtering, noise reduction, pop filtering, equalizing and normalizing.
Unless you have fantastic recording equipment and a sound proof room you're going to want to clean up the sound at least a little before uploading it.
I was here to comment this exactly.
@@michaelkenner3289 like the footsteps from the guy upstairs
I'm baffled by all the people here who thought Sideways did any singing in this video.
I'm still trying to put together the Singin' in the Rain thing. Like, the movie is about the villain getting dubbed over by a better singer, but the better singer was actually the lady who played the villain. So she dubbed over the lady who she was supposed be dubbed over by.
Xzibit would be pleased by this.
Yeah I was confused too
"Yo, dawg... I heard you like dubbing, so I made a movie that involves a lady being dubbed over by another lady, but the other lady is being dubbed over by the lady being dubbed in the movie..."
I'm not sure Sideways has got it quite correct . . . I don't think you can actually find the full information on Debbie Reynold's dubbing on the internet. But as far as I can tell, this is how it worked:
1. When Kathy Selden was dubbing the singing voice of Lina Lamont in the film scenes, Betty Noyes was dubbing Debbie Reynolds. You can tell this easily; it just doesn't look like that deep voice could be coming out of Debbie's mouth.
2. When Kathy is dubbing the speaking voice of Lina in the film scenes, it is Jean Hagen's actual voice.
3. In the songs 'All I Do', 'Good Morning' and the final rendition of 'Singin' in the Rain' (where Kathy is dubbing Lina live), it is Debbie's actual voice. You can tell this as it matches her speaking voice and sounds like her singing voice in other films in which she apparently did sing.
None of that really changes the fact that it's hilariously hypocritical that it's a film about dubbing where the dubber is dubbed when she is doing the dubbing! 😂
So in real life, the “hero” was actually the “villain” through the films point of view
Sally Jonesie yep that’s the way I remember reading up about it. Cannot absolutely confirm since it’s been a while.
we don't accept T-Pain slander in the Sideways household
Hey I didn't know you watched Sideways! Hello!
Hey, I know you!
T-Pain love or gtfo
Omg Emirichu hi 💖💖
YESSSS GIRL
Guy made an entire video just to make sure the world knows T-Pain can sing. Respectable.
As a singer, the only issue I take with pitch correction is how it sets the bar for live singing performances waaay higher than is reasonable, because so many people don't realize it's even there most of the time. Singing without it is basically just ASKING for people to think you're a mediocre singer sometimes T.T In keeping with the makeup analogy, it's like how sometimes women will be asked if they're sick just because they didn't wear makeup, as if the way a person looks while wearing it is the default and without it they look worse than they're supposed to and something must be wrong.
Greg Sonnier yup
yesss!! Completely agree! When I first started out singing, playing the guitar and songwriting I was too scared to show anyone in fear that they would compare me to a studio performance by really talented people. When i eventually found people who where into music themselves and understand how hard it is, I realised that the fear of being judged because you don't sound perfect is real, but unreasonable to hold yourself too.
soooo true. i'm a singer and i totally agree. the averege listener can't accept a normal live performance. and everybody is an X factor judge nowadays. a lot of people think like they are judging the performance and they can't simply enjoyed it and feel the music. not always, but...
Honestly, I don't get why people even think a pristine performance is desirable. People like live performances sounding a little rough.
if I want a sick day at work i just show up with no makeup and then clock out.
One thing to add is that both Millie Vanillie and Rebecca Black were taken advantage of by industry execs who thought they could make a bunch of money from them. They were forced into those situations after signing contracts they hadn't realised were so predatory. And it's real sad that in both cases a lot of people piled on the artists rather than the industry shits who actually were to blame.
Millie Vanillie ended up super broke and one of them developed a drug dependency and ODed.
Rebecca Black continues to make her own music, but (as revealed in a fantano interview) she's still trying to work out what her actual musical voice is - having been so shaken by this childhood experience that it messed up her relationship with her art.
Damn, that sucks. I made fun of Rebecca plenty as a kid, but dang. She's not a bad vocalist by any means, she was just dealt a bad hand.
Rebecca was featured in a Dorian Electra song recently so hopefully she's finding a niche that suits her.
Rebecca's feature on Edgelord is SO. GOOD. Y'all should really check it out
You wanna know why Rebecca Black had done Friday. Because of this girl named Alana Lee made a song called Butterflies and became popular at school so Rebecca had her parents contact the same company that Alana Lee used. How do I know this I went to the same middle school as both of them they were in 8th when I was a 7th grader. I remember our school freaking out about the school like a week before it went viral.
If I recall, Rebecca Black was not a victim being taken advantage of by a corporation. Her parents paid for her to have a song written and a music video shot which was initially a fun experience for her. The backlash from the video happened because her video was linked to a website that talked about how horrible her voice was.
Not sure why over a thousand people liked this comment without doing any kind of research. The Rebecca Black thing isn't that old guys.
Blaming Emma Watson for the film's audio mixing is like blaming the cast of Cats for the film's CGI. It makes no sense. She wasn't a producer or director.
Well, you can blame the cast in the sense that they all cashed in on the movie completely draining the budget. They should have been able to tell that there was no way this movie was going to be good with the amount of A-List actors thrown in there.
@@Salted_Fysh Come on, all star casts had existed since always and had even resulted in a few classics.
Also, it's Disney. Cash is not something they're lacking in.
@@Salted_Fysh and by "cast" you mean the director and the studio that did the actual casting, salary negotiation, and budgeting.
Also blaming Emma Watson for the film's audio mixing is like blaming the CGI of Cats for the character designs :')
Those things are why I have such a high respect for musical theater and opera. These singers are unbelievably well trained with their voice and their body. You see Opera-singers and musical theater actors literally fly in a harness and hit a high C.
That is what worthwhile things are about! Hard work!
Have you seen emily rohm in ride the cyclone? Her performance as jane doe live is absolutely jaw dropping! She hits incredibly high notes flawlessly all while in a harness spinning upside down and flying around! Shes incredible
jane doe :)
As soon as I heard "fly in a harness and hit high C", I thought of Jane Doe from RtC. I'm glad to know everyone else thought that too.
It seems like we've hit the uncanny valley of vocal performances. If you sound artificial enough to clearly not be a natural voice like Daft Punk, it's cool. If you mask the effect convincingly enoigh for it to go largely unnoticed, it's cool. Anything inbetween those two pisses people off because it's noticeable but not enough to seem intentional, and people *feel* like they are being deceived. That feeling is what makes the valley the no-no zone.
Holy shit you just explained what uncanny valley means to me, I never really understood what people meant and just assumed they meant unsettling or something but this makes so much more sense!
@@DJ-0 There's a few conclusions you could have come to on what uncanny valley is based on this comment, so I'm just gonna jump in and give an explanation of uncanny valley.
you were somewhat correct with it meaning that something is unsettling, but it only applies to something that is close to looking realistically human but not quite there, making it creepy.
Uncanny valley was a pretty good analogy to explain how people react to auto tuned music.
Yeah its also the reason why dolls and robots that look too human like feel creepy
That would be a good argument if more than a vocal 5% disliked these artists lmao
thank you for summarizing a 27 minute video
As a show choir member and theatre major, i can confirm that you actually can give a good vocal performance while moving like that, your diaphragm just needs to look like Arnold Schwarzenegger's arms
you have to have a tight ass core to be able to do that. kpop idols actually spend a lot of time training actually conditioning their bodies to sing and dance somewhat.
Lots of kpop idols trained by singing while running laps
Almost all of the Broadway stars of old could sing and dance.
Also, I thought that sometimes the recording was done after the scene was shot.
@@mervyngreene6687 Why only of old. Broadway singers now still need to do that.
@@montgomerymontgomery For the most part, I agree. I think the difference is that in the old days everybody had to do all of that eight or nine times a week. Without any electronic assistance.
.
The greats (Bernadette, Audra, Brian, Mandy) can clearly do it. Also, members of most shows' ensemble players (my favorites) can also.
I am suspicious of a number of performers who are cast because of their fame in other areas.
Also, I think miking musicals has lessened the experience. The sound of someone reaching the back of the theater unassisted is different from someone relying on mikes.
I sometimes wonder if Ethel Merman or Gwen Verdon would be the legends if shows were miked back then.
Few years ago I went to a Michael Bublé concert and at one moment he turned off the mic and asked the crowd for silence. He then proceeded to sing without a mic for around 20k people, and boy... it was amazing. I didn't even had good tickets (was really far away from the stage) and it sounded amazing.
Yep, that's the funny thing. The legitimately vocally talented people are still out there. But why bother when you can just pick a random buddy's daughter and turn them into Taylor Swift.
No, no, no, what you were hearing wasn’t real. Those guys electronics are so great that it catches his voice in the air and “cleaned” it up for you.
Nobody can sing perfectly, ok.
They can’t sing and dance like James Brown, or MJ the great, or even Tina Turner! All those acts, wether live with/without microphone, were not real. The Jackson five, shucks, they didn’t even existed.
@@AllUpOns this guy, from his presentation, doesn’t believe in talent.
@@AllUpOns I'm so tired of seeing this regurgitated narrative. Almost every single high-end pop vocalist out today is ridiculously good at singing. Also, who gives a crap? Music isn't a contest. If you enjoy vocal gymnastics - cool, good for you. Other people enjoy underground noisecore from Japan and genuinely think it's higher quality music than any "talented" vocalist. Stop pretending like there's objective truth to music. It's all just pattern matching through repetition in your brain at the end of the day.
@@nerothos just want to add that even musical contest on TV do pitch correction and auto-tuning.
Honestly tell these people "Just say you've never been to a live performance"
They sound different. Even with a pitch correcting microphone, it is different. You don't pay to hear it identical. You pay to go to a big party and see (from a distance anyway), the celebrity or musician you're a fan of, and hang out with friends. If you were paying to hear it sound exactly like it sounds super well cut and studio edited, they would just pay for the pre-recorded version.
The difference is the spectacle.
That's why I go see orchestra, because it's even better than recorded versions :D
Many big names have used auto-tune during live performances for at least a decade or so, and when properly applied it's almost imperceptible. But it's one of those things you can mount in a sound rack, an auto-tune module, and these days you probably can just run it live from a PC.
That's one the places where most kinds of popular music separate wildly from classical music.
With well done autotune you can fix that one note the singer screwed up, without anyone noticing.
But a well trained singer just will not screw up. That's the difference. Classical musicians can change interpretation a little from performance to performance and that's what people go for. You on the other hand, go for undertrained musicians to screw up differently.
I dunno bro Layne Staley sounded pretty great without correction.
No, I just go to see more talented musicians who actually sound amazing live.
Both Cher and T-Pain definitely used autotune like a vocoder, like an instrument or a tool to create a psychedelic sound. It’s v different from fixing vocal sections, they pushed the boundaries on purpose
Cher never used it in the '60's and through the 80's. So why is she using it now?
@@guineapiglady2841 She used it in ONE SONG as an effect. If she's using it routinely as "pitch correction" now is because (as explained in the video) everybody does it and people thinks you're a karaoke singer if you don't sound fake.
BTW, nobody used autotune "through the '80s" because autotune didn't exist. Most people just sang well and/or recorded multiple takes until they got a good result.
Calling T-Pain psychedelic doesnt sound right. 😂
@@IlBiggo I know. But still Cher....
@@guineapiglady2841 that's your response? Lol
"emma watson was a miscast as belle" and "it's not emma watson's fault they messed with her voice so much it made the performance terrible" are two statements that can and should coexist
Wait, so it's not her fault that she's the lead in a musical and cannot sing?
@@STOCKHOLM07 Except she can sing? Did you not finish the video?
@@Horsedogz But she really can't though
@@STOCKHOLM07 and you just missed the point of the whole video. Good job.
@@juanvelazco2179 Well to be fair, the point of the video in and of itself is flawed. Emma Watson isn't a singer, and the clip shown of her singing without pitch correction doesn't really prove much. Sure, she's "singing" and because there isn't a blatant layer of electronic sound it doesn't sound "bad', but her singing in that clip is honestly closer to talking on pitch. It's breathy and unsupported, and doesn't really prove anything ability-wise. Emma Watson was cast because she is a recognizable face that directors know can act very well. It is absolutely no secret that Holllywood prefers well-known faces with less singing talent to lesser-known faces (Broadway stars, for instance) with more singing talent. Jeremy Jordan being replaced by Zac Efron in The Greatest Showman is a great example of this. While Zac Efron is in a different boat from Emma Watson because he can "carry a tune" (his own words, although I'd give him a bit more credit than that at this point), Jeremy Jordan has an undeniably stronger voice than Zac does.
Emma Watson isn't a singer, and that's okay. She is a tremendously talented actress, but our pretending she is competent enough vocally for this role perpetuates the refusal to include properly trained (and talented) singers in Hollywood musical blockbusters. To be honest, most of the actors featured in these movie musicals aren't really competent singers (most of them would never even be considered on stage for the roles they are playing in these films). The issue is far more complex than just 'pitch-correction made me sound worse than I am'. While this is true to an extent, it's not the only reason her voice stands out amongst the rest of the cast.
Hats off to theatre actors to sing live on stage
Especially opera singers who sing without microphones in huge opera houses
@@starfire7322 Thank you!
@@pixelsupreme6824 yeah, they just have to sing against the acustics of the room and a 40+ gang of instruments called an orchestra. The reason for microphones is not the music they play it's the crowd size the want to please and it makes more money to play for ten of thousands of ppl in an stadium at wherever then maybe up to a thousand in an purpuse build room.
@@ConstantinEckhardt Not really though. It's also about the type of instruments, type of crowd and the proximity and position in relation to instruments, not just the size of the crowd for why mics get used. Opera singers benefit from really quiet crowds, usually pretty good acoustics, the fact that the orchestra don't sound nearly as loud as instruments at a rock or pop concert (because speakers are usually directed right into the crowd) and the fact that they are usually positioned physically above the orchestra and above the audience, which helps with projecting. If you've ever gone to a small hole-in-the-wall grunge club to a rock concert with MAYBE 60-100 people in the room at best, it doesn't matter how good a vocalist you are or how good you are at projecting - that crowd is going to be loud and right there in front of you, the drum kit and electric guitars are going to be right next to you or right behind you. A human's voice without a mic just will not compete with all of that coming from essentially the same level for the audience. The vocalist could make themselves heard, but it won't be at a level where it results in a good overall performance from the band.
Meh, HATS OFF FOR THE AUDIO ENGINEERS...
Bringing up BTS is a good point. K-pop groups are doing intense dances all while they are expected to sing perfectly. They can't, it's just not possible no matter how much training they get. Singing to the track, singing live, and with pitch correction is a good way that their fans still get what they paid for without disappointing them or massively overworking the performers on stage (more than they already are, K-pop industry is a mess). When they do it smartly, you can still hear the difference from the album, but sometimes you can hear the track in the back. Sometimes it's there to help the singers as well. There isn't anything wrong with it, it's a clever way to give a good performance while still keeping it genuine. Because realistically, their singing would be filled with breaths and huffs as they are dancing. Many endings you see idols breathing intensely, and that in main part is due to the dances. They still have real talent, pitch correction just helps them so they don't disappoint their fans because they couldn't sing the same they would standing in a studio recording an album while they are doing intense and elaborate choreo on stage.
There's nothing wrong with using a backing track when you have to dance and sing. The fans still get to hear them sing all the good parts and they get to take a breath once in a while. Personally I think them being constantly out of breath would sound worse than them skipping one line to be able to breath for a second lol
i mean, korean uses different air costs compared to english. Ppl forget that other languages use different parts of the vocal chords and diaphragm. Not saying they don't use effects in k music but it is something to consider.
Then stop dancing.
@@kareno7848 why. Whats so bad to have a live performance focus more on the flow of both dancing and singing together than just one of them. Just a different way of presenting something. If you want to watch someone for a really good singing performance, then do that. If you want a really good dance performance, watch that. Why would they have to change
@deusex9731 not to mention western artists, like Ariana for example, don't dance and yet still use all the techniques from the backtrack to the slight pitch correction.
Also, I don't think bts is a good representative of kpop since they are known for singing live (unlike many kpop performers) and we know they sing live bcs they... make mistakes and miss lines.
The autotune in Cher's Believe was used for the art of it, for the artistic effect, not to correct Cher's voice which is really cool and was really groundbreaking and innovative for the time
That was a vocoder, it's different than autotune.
@@randmiller88 They specifically used autotune
@@randmiller88 it was litterally just Autotune with the tolerance between notes set to zero
Shes an icon, shes a legend, and she is the moment!
That's why everyone used it, Cher sucks haha
I never actually questioned T-Pain's singing abilities. When everyone else "found out" that he can actually sing, I was baffled.
There is no way that those runs he does in his songs are purely achieved with auto-tune. Runs like that require skill and musicality.
Not gonna lie, I only knew T-Pain from memes and On a Boat. But watched the highlight reel of Masked Singer, and damn that dude is like Motown quality. But "you gotta have a gimmick to get ahead", so I respect the hustle.
@@mandisaw i knew about him from clint stevens
I just wanna make sure I've got this right:
Autotune is like drag makeup. It's supposed to be a dramatic effect, it's not meant to fool anyone into believing it's real.
Pitch correction is like nude makeup. People who complain about makeup don't even realize it's there most of the time, and it creates super unrealistic standards for everyone.
Now T-Pain can't ever wear makeup again and has to post a million #nofilter selfies so everyone knows that he actually looks good and they'll stop bashing him for the blue eyeshadow.
Dude that's fucking the best analogy ever!!!!!
@@lyrablack8621 I sure hope that analogy consented
I now have the image of T-Pain in drag stuck in my mind, thanks I hate it, I will never be free of this thought.
Edit: know -> now
@@randomfactsthatdontmatter3466 LMFAO I JUST GOT IT
Basically.
I went to see Imagine Dragons in concert and the lead singer, Dan, ran over to do the big drums for Radioactive and got so into it that he forgot to start singing so he literally made the band stop playing, announced what happened and then concluded by saying, "Well, at least you all know we're not lip-syncing." Still so funny to me, but so true! If I went to a concert and a band wasn't performing live, not gonna lie, I'd feel a bit cheated, and so would lots of other people. I think that same line of thought absolutely carries over into people's psychology surrounding auto-tune as well. Super interesting vid though, dude! Thanks for covering this!
Lip syncing only happens for televised live performances that go on TV. It doesn't happen on-stage for band performances. And artists themselves have NO say over it, it's all ordered by the label that the recording is signed under. If the label demands lip-syncing, and you want your paycheque, then you lip sync
@@pc_buildyb0i935 Depends entirely on the contract, which depends on their pull. Taylor Swift can do what the fuck she wants, I wager.
@@BWMagus One would think T Swift can do whatever she wants, but even SHE can't, as evidenced by the fact she could not even get back the recording rights to the material on her own debut album and had to go re-record the whole thing.
If someone as big as Swift doesn't have the legal power to nullify a decade-old label contract, you can imagine pretty much nobody else would.
The label still holds MUCH power and say over the final product and how it, and the royalties it generates, is distributed. Which is why so many artists are going indie these days
@@pc_buildyb0i935 It’s so messed up that they won’t let her buy her Masters. She has ungodly amounts of money, let her buy them!
@@Blueeyesthewarrior Copyright law is the devil. No amount of money will undo the lobbying and gerrymandering that occurred to put these stupid laws into place, which is why Swift had to re-record the entire album
Jesus, that singing in the rain thing is meta as fuck
Nice alex grey profile pic, rock on dude
I guess it was, I didn't really understand what was going on when he was explaining it lol 😂! Though honestly I never watched that movie so I wouldn't know anyway 🤷. Sounds fascinating though!
@@TheMeloettaful In the movie "Singing in the Rain" there is this very famous silent movie star, Lina, played by Jean Hagen. Lina has an unattractive voice and a very distinct accent, not a problem in silent movies. But silent movies are being replaced my movies with sound and voices (called talkies). The studio decides to make their next movie a talkie but Lina's voice make that impossible. Test audiences boo the movie. Then they get the idea to dub Lina's voice with another woman's voice. That sweet voiced woman is called Kathy and is played by Debbie Reynolds. But while fictional Kathy *can* sing like a professional, Debbie Reynolds, the actress, can't. So The real-life studio decided to dub Debby Reynolds playing Kathy dubbing Lina. But the real twist is that the actress who gives her singing voice to Debby Reynolds is Jean Hagen, the very actress playing Lina. So you have basically Jean Hagen providing her own vocals but with Debby Reynolds pretending to do it.
@Eva Papier Oh ok! Thank you for explaining it to me 😃! My brain was hurting trying to figure it all out 😭. Seems like they were doing the meta thing long before we were lol 😂!
mindf**K lol....
If folks wanna hear untouched live performances, support your small town theaters during their musical season (once it's safe to be in an enclosed space with strangers, of course)
Covid-19: i'm gonna ruin these small town theaters career
or your local rock/metal bands XD
Not everyone lives in a small town, though. I live in New York City. I do go to off-broadway, though, and one time I took a train to a small town in PA to see an actor from a TV show I liked in something... but I wouldn't tell other New Yorkers to do that just because Broadway makes a lot of money. See what you like, the point is to see it.
@@thezplayer3002 lmfaooooo I laughed way too hard
When I was in middle school I would always see the musicals put on by the theatre department, and now that I'm in high school I do the same
It's really cool to see how people the same age as me can put on stellar performances with like no pitch correction (that I know of)
This is a fantastic video. Something that no one gets about autotune/pitch correction is that it only fixes pitch. As a music producer, I can tell you that tone, timber, and phrasing will still sound bad if you can't sing. Autotune/pitch correction will actually make a bad vocal performance sound worse. It really is just the icing on the cake.
A very good point
And still in some genres I would prefer non of that icing.
YOU’RE RUINING THE TIMBERRRR
As someone who sucks at singing, and still tried with pitch correction. You're 110% right
Timber, lmao.
even kpop groups who are trained for months to years just to have stable voices during performances use backtracks live and u can even hear their voices crack as they sing on top of it lol so it really bugs me when people try to use "autotune" as a reason to hate on them as if their faves aren't using it too lmao,, i also don't like it when reverb gets called autotune in general like?? 😭 but hopefully this video helped others understand the differences,, thanks for the vid!
Kpop Groups use lipsync or a backtrack very often.
Here this Channel made a bunch of Videos about that:ruclips.net/channel/UCvQy1DG7084e8cFX2p0WgRw
The thing is auto tune has become an all reaching word for any voice altercation kinda like band-aids became the name for adhesive bandages. It’s technically wrong but when you say “I need a band-aid” everyone easily knows they’re referring to an adhesive bandage even if it’s not the band-aid brand. So when someone says “it has too much auto tune” they’re referring to literally every single voice altercation in a way that the other people will recognize and say “I like it, it’s very stylized” or “yeah, this is kinda annoying let’s change the station”
yeah kpop fans are obsessed with this crap, and honestly anything else they can use to put their group on top while belittling others. and i never understood that. like, aren't the idols already working their asses of, why are you now demanding ALL of them sound amazing at all times, including non-vocalists. I can't imagine the amount of pressure they must be under. They're entertainers first and foremost, and most of them aren't even real vocalists. Those who are (and there are many amazing ones), will show it. they'll sing ballads and OSTs and go on shows like masked singer. But constantly scrutanising every live performance, especially the dance heavy ones... it's just inane.
@@handleonafridge6828 yes! sadly not everyone is interested to know the differences between autotune and voice altercation )): these days it's even harder for people to notice them on songs since the tech has gotten waaaay better
@@小鹿-p8f ugh the clowning during dance-heavy performances 😭 they're having trouble breathing with singing and dancing already, please let them have shaky voices once in a while lmao,, plus there are other videos on yt and other platforms that showcase their vocals anw, so it's fair to say that maybe sometimes it just wasn't going their way because they are human afterall~ also, i have experience w/ dancing while singing, it's really hard to have a stable voice lmao they just make it look easy 😭
I think the real issue is that everyone is using more and more auto-tune because its sound has become the norm. So now when you hear a singer perform live without any effects, it sounds like they can't sing very well by comparison to their artificial voice. That, to me, is the biggest consequence of auto-tune. People are so used to the fake sound that a regular singing voice sounds lackluster. This is similar to how seeing someone without their makeup can make them seem ugly by comparison if you have only ever seen them wearing makeup.
I think the real issue is that everyone is using more and more fire because food is no longer dangerous it has become the norm. So now when you bite raw meat without any cooking, it tastes not so well by comparison to its artificial taste. That, to me, is the biggest consequence of cooking. People are so used to the fried meat with salt that a regular raw steak tastes lackluster. This is similar to how hearing someone without their toolkit can make them seem ugly by comparison if you have only ever heard them producing music and avoiding restrictions of stupid meat human body.
@@morgensheeeern I mean... Raw meat can make you sick.
@ I think they're being sarcastic...
Then again maybe YOU'RE being sarcastic as well by playing along, and I myself didn't notice...
Oh hold on. I just read it again and it seems they were actually serious with that raw steak argument. Oh wow....
It's kind of like people being used to seeing "beautiful" social media influencers then getting disappointed if those people magically happen to have wrinkles, pores, callouses, etc. in real life. Imo humans just keep pushing standards high up that being *"real"* is going deeper down the spectrum.
Thank you for this. As an engineer, I’ve used autotune as an effect a lot, and it does NOT sound good if your singer can’t sing. Even with what T-Pain does, if you can’t sing, it won’t sound good. No one seems to get that.
Are you a singer?
EDBA 1.0 Yes I am. I used to suck and I’m a lot better now, and the pitch correction sounds waaaaay better now. No crazy artifacting, no annoying warbles, just smooth and clean (most of the time).
@@HydetheRapper Are autotune different from pitch correction? I always want to know
EDBA 1.0 Essentially, pitch correction is autotune without the auto part. You go through and adjust each note individually. That also gives you more control, so you can get a more “natural” sound-less robotic. Since autotune works automatically, it tends to create a more robotic sound (like what T-Pain often does).
@@HydetheRapper oh i get it now, felt bad for t-pain i already watch his desk performance and damn he actually can sing good
truly we never deserved T-Pain, he is too good for this earth
Amen
We don't deserve your content, the only voice of reason in cinematic themes.
Indeed, what did we ever do to deserve t-pain?
sorry tallahassee pain :(
This channel should have used a clip of his auto tune voice since I have never heard of him.
It's like people don't know that Cher and Tpain have been singing their asses off long before they started using autotune
Yeah, people just seem to forget that Cher had a very lucrative career in the 60s and 70s.
I'm an audio engineer specializing in studio sound and, from your title, I was expecting to hate this video. I clicked on it with my eyes rolling like, "Oh great, another guy who doesn't know the difference between Auto-Tune and Melodyne making a video essay blowing hot air." But that's not what this was. This was incredibly well researched and you've explained the concepts so clearly to your audience. I really commend you for this. Auto-Tune/pitch correction is just a tool, that's it. While you can certainly clean up performances with it, it's not some magic button that will turn garbage into diamonds. That's not to say there's not some critiques we can make about the overuse of Melodyne and similar tools-because there is a lot to critique about that-but the things that people are typically mad about when it comes to pitch correction are things that just...are wrong. Because people, on a fundamental level, just don't understand what those tools are and what they do. So thank you!
I think a few celebs have added to the mis-representation of auto-tune as well. I remember there was an article here in Canada on Avril Lavigne being interviewed on her first or second album back in the 2000s. She was asked why her voice is so radically different live. Her answer was that she can't hit most of the notes you hear on the album, so the producer simply autotuned her voice to go much higher than her real vocal range. Unfortunately, this interview resulted in the general public assuming that this was all auto-tune (or digitally enhancing/cleaning the vocals/compositions) was. Even though these kinds of techniques can be used in everything from filtering out unneeded noise that may have been caught in the recording, to smoothing transitions, and even vocal arrangements. I once had a co-worker who was looking at going into the field of producing so his insights were educational to say the least.
ALL AUDIO SIGNAL PROCESSING IS AUTOTUNE!!1!
Thank you !!! What a great comment. Very knowledgeable and so true, so many people have no idea of the difference between AT and melodyne .
Live or even recorded none of this technology can turn "garbage into diamonds" any more than make-up can make an old lady young (think Barbara Cartland) and any attempt to do so is going to sound really weird, and also predictable because an inadequate or damaged voice is not a sufficient control input. The only way to restore a ruined voice and not be fake is to have inputs from a myoelectric collar combined with the vocals using a GAN neural network. A good test would be to get the singers of Echo and the Bunnymen and System of a Down back to their former glory. Though with further development you could make it deepfake in real time any great singer or combination-lets say Freddie Mercury combined with Roy Orbison.
I don't really know much about music, but this video makes sense for me.
This is semi-unrelated, but I do enjoy older music instead of newer music as the newer music feels more insincere than older music, I'm still not sure why.
re singin' in the rain: lets not ALSO forget that the sounds of Debbie Reynold's tap dancing was also dubbed (by Gene Kelley) bc she couldnt do that either. The premise of that movie was SO ironic given how much of Debbie's performance wasn't hers.
Debbie Danced her ass off in that movie. Have you watched it? "Not her performance" good lord.
@@TheHomerowKeys just dancing the choreography and actually having to physically tap dance are 2 completely different challenges. Tap dance is not just dance, but also an acoustic, musical performance as well. She did not have to worry about producing the percussion required of tap dancing, she just had to mimic the right steps w/o worrying too heavily about the proper technique. So no, the performance was not entirely hers.
what we'd have to do nowadays though is sample one tap of the shoe and then draw the whole routine out on a grid and then wonder for ages why we can't get it sounding natural and flowing
If everyone’s pitch corrected... no one is. *evil laughter*
pack it up, syndrome from incredibles
*evil laughter autotuned*
@@the24throguecannon Evil laughter *pitch corrected*
Yes, but unironically. If everyone's special, then no one is special. People aren't equal and will never be.
Wow, this is the first time I've seen this meme used in a PERFECT situation where it fully makes sense.
Just goes to show how underappreciated musical theatre singers/dancers/actors are
I really appreciate how you set the record straight with T-Pain’s vocal talent as well as how you emphasized that pitch correction is just a part of modern music. I hope that this video helps make the conversation about creativity one with a bit more understanding.
@Alexander Supertramp Yeah, and your comment resonates with me -- but at least now we get to talk about what the tradeoffs are. Sure, some art is enhanced beyond the artist's ability to perform in front of a live audience. We readily accept the winning version of the work in writing and film without thinking about the scores of drafts being discarded. Even I am editing this comment as I go along writing it in a way that would sound perhaps more structured or organized than if I'd just blurted it out across a coffee table with you. When I spend a few extra minutes going over my words, the advantage is that you get to read something that's better for a variety of reasons at the cost of feeling less real and I'd argue that the "bad thing" in our case doesn't matter very much. I'd argue that the sadness and anxiety from unrealistic expectations is far, far worse. The internal and external criticisms of "you're not as good as the edit" sound very much like whatever the opposite of creativity is.
Except he knows nothing about music and doesn't even understand the difference between music, movies, musicals and theater. His drivel takes parts of Hollywood and Disney business practices projecting them on music, and his judgement is extremely flawed. Many musicians can easily outperform their albums.
@@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 What are you talking about? Even if you don't use ''autotune'' for your album recording, it will logically be better than a live version.
@@legrandliseurtri7495 No, it won't. Nothing beats the expression and intonation of a singer who actually has some years of real training.
@@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 What??? Are you unable to read or something? I'm talking about the same singer performing in a studio vs performing live.
It's not just pitch correction, it's midi editing, comping (which means finding bits of the best takes and putting them together), warping (increasing/decreasing speed), quantizing, filtering, compressing, etc, etc. Basically anything that's studio produced has all of those elements, which means whatever you hear is a completely artificial performance. So there's really no point in complaining about pitch correction/auto tuning when so much other stuff is happening.
“Everything” and “anything”? Hyperbole is unhelpful.
What do you mean by "midi editing"?
You know what, this video and your comment kind of miss the point. I complain about all these things you mentioned. I'm not complaining about autotune because it's "cheating". I just don't like the way it sounds (and yes, most of the time you can tell). If it's electronic music or something related, no problem. If it's part of the artist's identity, no problem at all. But if it's a tune that is meant to be performed by a singer or instruments, then yeah, I take issue with this. If it's a rock tune, I would like it to sound as close as it would sound if I saw the band live. I don't want to be every kick/snare to be perfectly in time, and I don't want every note that the singer sings to be exactly on pitch all the time. Perfect music is boring. Imperfections add personality and humanity to music. Removing imperfections gives the feeling that you're listening to the same tunes over and over again, as if they were written by robots. Rick Beato made a great video on quantizing which explains and demonstrates that better than I can do here.
@@Elemy69 well... I like that you think, that "you can tell". The only way to tell a good mastered pitch corrected performance apart from an uncorrected performance is, if the singer made a mistake in the uncorrected one. It's not like you can't tell it, because you didn't train your ears enough. You can't hear the difference it because there is no physical difference in the sound.
Saying that you have a problem with pitch correction, because you like the imperfections is like... I dont know... why would I even bother to train singing if it is not supposed to sound the way I want it to sound.
@@Elemy69 as soon as overdubs became standard, the difference between live and studio became irrevocably severed. And that was in the 50's/60's.
So apparently the Luke Evans interview is phase inverted?
And evidently that's on collider's end, not mine and I didn't notice it otherwise I might've been able to do something about it.
That means that if you're hearing this video in mono you won't be able to hear Luke Evans's interview very well, but it'll come through fine on headphones
Sorry!
The singers that I listen aren't pitch-corrected because I mainly listen to Frank Sinatra and Ella Fitzgerald. And they heavily favoured single full takes.
It’s all good! Besides that little hiccup your video was awesome & very well done! 👍🏾
Thanks for letting us know! I started to worry that I was going deaf 🦻🏾 or something!
The reason they first roboticized Cher and Usher's vocals in the early 2000's was because word was spreading about auto-tune. The robotic sound was a red herring. Thank you for this video clarifying the matter.
Hey, I love your videos! I'm not a content creator on youtube so I don't know this, but is there a way to make it so that the video has automatic subtitles? English isn't my first language and they really help me out a lot. Thanks :)
It is all in your head
Part of the appeal of folk music for me is that it is very raw compared to a lot of pop. Live tracks sound just as beautiful as the album tracks. The Lumineers for example, in their earlier albums you can hear the echos of the room they’re recording in. It gives it an authentic feel and that’s what draws me in
"T-Pain is a better vocalist than you or I will ever be"
The truth hurts.
YOU again.
So is Soundwave apparently.
@@mnky75 T-pain: superior, soundwave: inferior
Well.. im not that good... so its not really surpricing.
Dude I have come across you in three separate videos today. 90s commercial nostalgia, every mentos commercial, and this one, wtf lol
I've never had a problem with autotune the way T-Pain (for example) uses it. When you do it THAT MUCH it's obvious you're going for an effect, a specific, different sound. I mean I grew up in the '80s, the synth generation, I can't say anything about "if it's electronic it isn't 'real music'".
People: "Autotune bad!"
Vocaloid producers: 👀
This. No need to worry about autotune if the vocal is fully synthesised. I love vocaloid.
@@kitansan Vocaloid allows for so many different avenues of vocal production. Prime example: The Disease Called Love. Sure, you can make the same effect with human voices but I don't think it would have the same impact. Using synthetic voices makes the song sound more atmospheric and in-line with the theme of the song.
don't need to worry people pointing out that you're shifting pitches when you *made* the pitches
I think Vocaloid appeals to me so much because it does what autotune does, but even more. My favorite example is GHOST's Entomologists, which edits the song to sound more insectoid and less human on top of the inhumanity of voice bank singing.
I was wondering why this video was recommanded to me so many times. Like, sure I'm interested in music and it's production, but I'm mostly interested in vocaloids, sooo... But now I know, YOUR COMMENT probably motivated the algorithm in a way or in an other. And I don't regret anthing, vocaloid related or not, this video was great. So, thanks you I guess ! 8D
I don't care if an artist can even sing well or perform live, if the music they release sounds good, then they're clearly talented and know how to use the tools at their disposal to make good music.
I second this take
Same. I don't like how a lot of people seem to only care about the physical performance aspect of music. It's an art, not a sport. Not to diminish the importance of performers, just that some people take it way too far.
@@17thstellation reminds me of how people see digital art as easier and the computer basically does it for you, it doesn't at all, it just gives you more tools to work with. yes it is easier, but who cares, the point is to make good art.
@@BWMagus That's an unnecessarily toxic way of saying that producers should get more credit. I agree, but also - why the obsessive focus on single artists? Can't we just call a song made by multiple people a team effort?
Also, you're way too quick to assume that everyone listens exclusively to the absolute most mainstream chart-topping pop artists. It's not true - I've yet to meet a single person who doesn't enjoy at least some stuff that's a bit more niche.
No shade meant, but I think you mean disposal instead of exposal.
The phase is inverted in the Luke Evens interview, it’s silent through my mono speaker
I definitely thought it was meant to be a joke at first until he started talking about the content of the interview.
I thought this was a bit trippy. I'm listening on my phone, which has top and bottom (left and right in landscape) speakers.
I was like "why does it suddenly feel like my phone is behind my head"
Edit: perhaps it was a subtle attempt at preventing being smote by the copyright Gods? (if they combined the L&R audio channels so there's less processing needed to be done on the video. Then all that the neural net would "hear" is silence)
thats why it sounded so weird
oh is that a thing. my right speaker broke so I turned my PC to mono, and it's impossible to hear him. definitely thought he was doing a bit.
Max Haupt Yeah, mono is both sides combined. When they are exact opposites they cancel out.
Pitch correction is like CGI. You only realize when its bad.
Exactly.
Damn that's right
Yes... I doubt Disney got many complaints about the CGI rooftops visible in this very video. People don’t realize how much CGI is used to accomplish really mundane things.
That's a really good way of putting it.
Ivy Allie Exactly. There’s that one shot during Belle where the camera booms up to look in the distance at Gaston and Lefou and those rooftops always stood out to me as being CGI. I’m just glad someone else noticed that.
Poor T-Pain, he's probably so tired of people asking him: "bUt cAn yOu sInG wItHoUt aUtOtuNE?"
T, Pain.
@@nathanNSM Them Pain!!
Im sure he makes too much money to give a gotdamn lmao.
@@Ashes2Ashes_Blush2Blush Oh yes, the "this artist is doing a lot of money so we shouldn't care if people treat him awful" argument
@@sebasmusician736 🙄🤣
I meant that in the most genuine way possible but okay.
Anyway I stand in my work cause at the end of the day when you are as successful as you are you realize the ignorance of others will never outshine your success. Such as Michael Jackson. He we through hell but he overcame it and still is the King of Pop today AND people STILL talk shit about him.
People didn't lead to his demise, but the Doctor was.
He didn't kill himself.
Yes people say hurtful shit. But when you are below these people, they have no place in their mind to worry about them, they are lesser.
I've worked with Demi and Dallas Lovato. I asked them how they dealt with all the shit they got from people making memes and stuff about Demi. As much as it was hurtful, they said that it made them laugh because people had no idea what they were talking about. Thus shaped my opinion of others.
If I was as successful and had all that money you best believe I wouldn't give two shits about what someone said about me.🤣🤷🏾♀️
It really bugs me when actors get blamed for how poorly movies turn out. Even if the actor can't act, it's still the people in charge's fault for hiring them and not giving good enough direction. Even if Emma Watson couldn't sing, it wouldn't be right to bully her for it because Disney is the one who gave her the leading role in a musical. Also don't bully people in general.
Don't forget people bullied Jake Lloyd (I think thats his name) into becoming a drug addict because people hated him as kid Anakin (instead of blaming the people in charge of casting) and bullied a man to the point where he almost committed suicide because some people hated Jar Jar and refused to leave it at hating the character or turing their annoyance at the people in charge of writting. I don't know what it is with people and misdirecting their annoyance and thinking its okay to go after the actors when all they did was sign a contract because they liked the scrip or wanted to get their name out there for potentially bigger roles.
The bit about Singin' in the Rain is blowing my mind.
He needs to rewatch the film and check IMDB trivia. They only dubbed over one song and one line of Debbie Reynolds'. And Lina Lamont is definitely not the victim in the film. She's snooty and mean, agrees to be dubbed, and wants Kathy to he her movie voice and not have a career of her own.
@@lindenpeters2601 Yeah I came here to comment this. If you thought Lina was the victim before she tries to steal the studio, you didn’t watch the first 15 minutes where she gets Kathy fired from her job for an accident and refuses to speak to Don until he’s famous.
Fun fact: the grandmother from Disney’s Mulan (or her singing voice) was also Marni Nixon.
Huh
and tragically underused. She sings, like, one entire sentence.
Also, Lea Salonga did the singing voices for both Mulan and also Princess Jasmine in Aladdin.
@@logosandopenings True.
My issue with beauty and the beast is about how the heavy editing takes me out of the emersion of the movie. The vocals are so heavily edited that it makes it hard to be part of the world for a minute.
It's ESPECIALLY noticeable in the "Belle" number, too - Emma's stuck following up flipping record-breaking Tony Award Winner AUDRA MCDONALD who they gave the new opening song to, AND the terrible sound editing (or whatever they did, frankly I'm still not entirely convinced she wasn't pitch-corrected).
And in the same song, the ensemble is ABSOLUTELY KILLING their performances. I'm sure they were all pre-recorded as well, but even with the exaggerated affectations some of them do, they're all just totally blowing her out of the water. Whatever editing they did to Emma made her sound flat and lifeless, but she really just wasn't able to hold her own in a musical like this anyway.
I say that as someone who thinks that Emma Watson would literally be the PERFECT Belle... in a non-musical version of Beauty and the Beast.
@@amypatterson7395 Of course Emma was pitch corrected, and Audra McDonald was too.
The idea of tuning something implied to be a bit more medieval or fairytale type to the point where it sounds like a pop song just feels a little tonally dissonant. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for that glamor and robotic feel, but watching a woman in a bodice and old fashioned wear sing it out feels off.
@@isyoursheepwireless but there is a huge difference. Audra correction is barely noticeable, while Emma sounds terrible and liveless.
I don't have a problem with autotune in 2 cases: it's not noticeable, or it is used in full effect, like daft punk. In case with Emma and thousands of Pop stars, when they use auto tune on medium, they fall into uncanny valley to me. They are sound robotic but not robotic enough, and it's absolutely terrible
The best part of that movie is "Roughly the size of a baaaaa-HAAAARGE"
Fascinating. I'm an old school (1970s-80s) producer/engineer that worked in this field long before the advent of auto tune and pitch correction. You'd get a singer in the studio that would typically do several takes of the song, and then you'd either pick the best bits, or 'punch-in' corrections of mistakes/bad parts; usually a combination of both. (Same would often go for guitar solos, etc.) Sometimes you could mask inconsistencies with judicious use of reverb or delay, or even flanging.
You'd feel real lucky if you got a singer/players that had a lot of nightly gigging experience, as their chops would be up to par and you could expect consistent performances and also good stamina for longer sessions. The worst would be the 'bedroom singers' who had little to no experience singing nightly in front of live audiences. They would usually only have one or two strong takes before they'd fatigue, or get easily demoralized when they heard what they actually sounded like on playback, etc.
It's just amazing to see how complicated and 'iffy' it has all got today with these digital crutches and enhancements as part of the palette you routinely have to work with.
I feel the problem in general is that it is such a calculated industry. There's so much bulk pop that gets pushed to success with the power of advertising that the mainstream is too dull to follow - personally I will only turn back to have a look after years since a pop artist's initial success if it seems like there was something there worth listening to.
Even if the vocals were all real it gets boring fast when your vocal melody has three notes in it, one of them being sung 80% of the time. Add to that the strive for technical perfection - if it's done well it is only void of soul, but if they rushed it you hear the autotune squeal as well leading to a rise in blood pressure.
And as for the use as an effect... You don't use a bitcrusher or ring modulator for vocals just because you can either so why has auto-tune/pitch shift as effect been popular for so long?
Auto Tune can't make you sing, it either fixes tiny details or creates a new sound/ effect
yep also if your pitch is that bad it will just be exposed you SUCK so these people can sing otherwise the autotune or pitch etc wouldnt go so smooth
Can we expect a video about auto tune and pitch correction for Bannerlord? ;)
Of course it doesn’t sing for you but mediocre singers become great because of it.
@@ploppyjr2373 Not famous ones. Good singers are a dime an American Idol dozen. No label is dropping a few mil to groom you without the base skills, and singing just isn't high art. It's practically programed into our DNA, and singing can be taught.
Unless you're Stuart Ashens, testing an auto tune app by singing awful on purpose, only to be shocked when it comes out sounding good.
I do wonder if there’s an “uncanny valley” factor for pitch correction that throws audiences off.
If Hollywood is trending towards more live recordings and movie musicals, I do hope they increase the hiring of musical theatre actors
This!
When people say it sounds artificial, they mean that it stops sounding entirely human. And this can be off-putting when it becomes too noticeable.
Oh yes. It’ll also help to negate the effect of hiring for clout and prolificness that seems to pervasive in Hollywood.
Amen brother. Hollywood needs a shakeup.
Yes! Like there’s so many talented musical theatre actors, yet they still hire movie stars who can’t sing
So do I
Your weird rants are the only thing that’s keeping me sane :)
Same
Same here!
Oh God same..
Debbie Reynolds did some of her own singing in Singin' in the Rain. She was dubbed by Betty Noyes when the song was out of her range. If you listen carefully, you can hear her voice change from one song to the next. That's Debbie's voice live-dubbing "Singin' in the Rain" when they pull open the curtain, but Betty Noyes sings for her right afterwards in her "You Are My Lucky Star" duet with Gene Kelly. Jean Hagen only dubbed one line for Debbie Reynolds: "Nothing can keep us apart. Our love will last till the stars turn cold." She didn't sing for Reynolds at all.
In the movie "My Fair Lady," Audrey Hepburn and Marni Nixon take turns singing in the song "Just You Wait." Hepburn starts the song herself, but then Nixon takes over at "One day I'll be famous, I'll be proper and prim/ Go to St. James so often I shall call it St. Jim..." (Now, in the Broadway production, Julie Andrews sang for herself, thankyouverymuch.) Nixon dubbed for lots of actresses in musicals. Another famous one was for Deborah Kerr in "The King and I". Her voice is pretty recognizable once you know what to listen for. She had a distinctive way to pronounce "you" in songs like "I Can Do Very Well Without You" (My Fair Lady) and "Getting to Know You" (The King and I). Personally, I find it a bit off-putting. Kind of like auto-tune.
Marni Nixon's lesser-known soundtrack was in "The Screaming Skull," a low-budget horror movie staring Peggy Webber (96 at the time of this writing, Webber was an every-mom character actress; she was in 13(!) Dragnet episodes, no-doubt being encouraged by Jack Webb to stick to "just the facts, ma'am" in each one). Nixon sang a non-verbal descant over the movie's climactic ending to create an eerie mood. At the time she was married to the music director: Ernest Gold, so she probably worked cheap.
Everyone in the comments keeps bringing up their favorite singers (Ben Platt, Freddie Mercury, Mariah Carey, etc.) as proof that not everyone "needs" pitch correction, that there exist these perfect unicorns who sound great every time they open their mouths, but the thing is... they're only human. Freddie Mercury got tired after a long concert. Ben Platt gets sore throats. Mariah Carey probably has days where she can't hit all of her famous whistle notes. Shit happens, and no one's going to give the same kind of performance every day. Even with pitch correction in microphones, there's still a world of difference between a live setting with a bunch of people and an unpredictable atmosphere and a perfectly controlled studio setting. No one's saying that people *never* sound good live. But people aren't perfectly tuned computers who can replicate the exact same performance every time--they're human beings, and human beings will screw up sometimes. And there's no shame in that.
Edit: Wow, a lot of you guys just... didn't read my original comment *or* watch the video, did you? Yes, music has existed before pitch correction--point to me where I ever insinuated that it didn't. All I literally said is that all of your favorite performers were human beings who had off days where they didn't sound their best, and to pretend they didn't is to do them a great disservice.
Steve Perry was one such unicorn. He churned out a perfect vocal performance night after night for several years during Journey's nutty tour schedule. He pulled out when it was taking a toll on him mentally and physiologically, but his vocal chops never fatigued during that time. This was solely attributable to his highly-honed breath support and technique. For others, without those techniques/training, it leads to pitchiness on the stage (at least) and, at worse, developing polyps and other health issues.
Even Freddie Mercury hardly ever sang the highest notes in his music in concert. He was an absolute powerhouse of a singer but he still had his weaknesses. Acknowledging that doesn't change anyone's mind about his talents.
does Mariah even hit those whistle notes anymore?
tbh we should just accept imperfect human performances rather than expect uniformized studio-like live shows
Elisa Soh if you asked a few years ago, the answer would be rarely, but in the last couple of years she’s started using her whistle register regularly again
Side note: Darth Vader was voiced by someone else without ever knowing until he heard it when the movie came out
Rip david prowse (it's his voice originally and then JEJ dub him)
David Prouse delivered a stunning physical performance. Darth Vader would not have been the same with either part. Still a dick move not to tell the guy...
David Prowse dubbed by James Earl Jones!
@@aayla9982 Nooooooooooooooo
@@Beunibster huh?
I'm a fan of live theater so I think natural voice talent is an underappreciated art. But I think your comparison of pitch correction to makeup is a really good one. Yes it can cover up natural beauty and individuality but it can also be an art form of its own.
A lot of people see high production and pitch correction as inauthentic but the counterpoint to that is artists like Grimes, who does almost all of the production in most of her songs by herself (from vocal to instrumentals) allowing her songs to be mostly her own vision with little outside input. She isn't a stellar violinist or guitarist and she can't match her album vocals live but she pitch corrects to limit outside influences in her music.
I think the artistic autonomy that pitch correction and production can afford indie artists is not to be undervalued either
musical theatre on stage doesn't use pitch corrector, which proves that it is possible to sing amazingly whilst dancing
also i'm obsessed with your channel, like I love it! keep it up :)
it does require specific training and a lot of endurance though
@@jestphoenix yeah most pop artist aren't trained properly for it. Only a few like Beyonce and Pink are great at it constitently.
That’s somewhat not true. Extremely hard notes to hit like Elle Woods’s last note in “so much better” and Christine Daaé’s E6 in “Phantom of the Opera” are dubbed or pitch corrected. Many people have been known to destroy their voices singing Christine Daae’s E6 night after night, so dubbing is pretty much a necessity. But for the most part, you are correct! Most of the time live performances are given unless the note is extremely taxing on the voice. (Sorry I feel like a nerd lol, not meaning to attack or anything) :)
the most annoying thing is when people call any effect they hear on the vocals "autotune," like no actually thats just Equalisation, compression, distortion and reverb
That's just details most people don't care about. When most people say auto-tune, they don't mean it the same way you seem to do. They really just mean that it's been altered in a noticeable way. If the average person can tell that it's been altered, then the alteration wasn't done right.
@@darkfool2000 sure but that's what they're saying: people say every effect is auto-tune when it isn't, its just musical effects.
@@kizzyharris3727 I think you're missing my point. It's pedantic to complain that people are misusing jargon like auto-tune. Most people don't know and most people don't care, because for most people it does not matter at all. I could say that I dislike a song because of auto-tune, and you would go "actually that's pitch distortion" and it literally wouldn't matter because the meaning I would be ascribing to auto-tune, is not the same one you would be using. This isn't a conversation between sound engineers where that distinction would be useful, and outside of that sort of context, it doesn't matter.
@@darkfool2000 okay? That doesn’t change that what they’re complaining about ISNT auto tune loo
@@kizzyharris3727 It matter because unless the conversation is happening between sound engineers what they're complaining about IS autotune. Because to them autotune is a shorthand for modifying a singer vocals.
Same thing with "CGI" it's common to hear people say that CGI kills otherwise good movies. Where in reality, when done in a standard way correctly, you should not be able to tell it's there. This makes the sum of production, budget, and CGI greater than what would be possible without CGI.
What are some other misrepresented aspects of production? Over-the-top lighting? no, what do you think?
Parasite has some of the best CGI I have ever seen. It's so good that there is only one scene where is noticeable.
@@moodyfingers7301 I have not seen it, but from the trailer it looks interesting, is it worth a watch?
It amazes me how Aslan from the 2005 Narnia film looks way better than many of the effects in Marvel movies
@@bradleyelacombe Worth every second.
@@moodyfingers7301 I'll give it a watch this weekend. Thanks.
If I ever have a karaoke bar, the pitch correction mic is going to be a must. The most ethical use for a pitch correcting mic 🎙
You big softie. It would be far more amusing to randomly detune people so they sound horrible.
@@apathyboy it would be fun to have the power to do both, depending on the person
@@apathyboy that would be hilarious
Thanks to you I found a good question to ask if I don't want to ask if they are into S&M B)
People who bring their singing in the shower/car voice, and do it with gusto, are the best karaoke performers.
I always wanted to know how Beauty and the Beast ended up sounding so incredibly bad. It was my go to for bad singing. But Im glad there is some kind of explanation with why it sounds so clearly heavily edited.
I feel like so many comments are from people who read the title, but didn't actually watch the video :D
Ikr
Pretty much par for the course on RUclips 🙄
is too long for shut a short tittle, i got bored at minute 5 and i could see where it was going, while i still think they could be a problem with auto tune it seems that this video covers something else, starting from history
@@MAMware The idea that there's this problem with Auto-tune is false. Auto-tune specifically is an artistic choice people use.
Pitch correction, (what most people think of when they think Auto-tune) is used by pretty much everyone in the industry, and it's rarely noticeable, (if you can notice it, it's most likely an artistic choice). Not only that, but people do more than just pitch correction. (I think this video is the one I'm thinking about which explains this very well). ruclips.net/video/RF67YxdCJdk/видео.html
There is this weird double standard people put on the voice, even though it's just as much of an instrument as the Piano, Saxophone etc. If I were to pitch correct or add effects to any of these other instruments, no one would bat an eye, as soon as it's the voice though? suddenly I'm not talented, I can't sing, I'm covering shit up etc.
Why is it a bad thing to pitch correct vocals? If it makes it sound the best it can, then I see no problem.
@@lekebabfrancais9018 Because people are often over protective about their opinions and would treat them as fact. Take it from me, someone who didn't believe the truth on "where babies come from" until 7th grade.
I’m just at the beginning, so you’ll probably say this, but... auto-tune cranked up to 10 like that doesn’t work if you’re not essentially on-pitch, since If you’re more than a quarter-tone off it’ll tune you to the wrong semitone... and manual pitch-correction generally isn’t perceptible. The whole idea that people using auto-tune can’t sing is laughable, a bad singer with auto-tune sounds even worse than without
It will correct you to a good note if you set auto tune to a certain key scale such as c minor
MizzzyMike good point, you’re right. I guess my main point was just that in general that if you actually can’t sing, pure auto-tune with no manual adjustment doesn’t really make it sound like you can, it sounds a mess lol
Have you ever used the I Am T-Pain app? Idk if it even works on modern iPhones anymore, but if you tried to sing onpitch on that, your voice would sound pretty normal. It was only when you sang all over the place that you got the T-Pain effect. That's why it sounds distorted like it does -- that's the artifacts of the correction process.
Yeah! I sometimes use autotune to quickly check if I'm on the right note. If the pitch jumps around then I'm definitely not :P
@@MizzzyMike I mean still if you sing a bit too sharp it will think you're trying to reach a higher note than you actually are. But of course one can always just draw MIDI and make the pitch correction plugin to correct to the it.
I FORGOT ABOUT THAT SIMON COWELL REACTION. Oh god, I needed that laugh.
Also, lmao, that Avatar: Last Airbender reference in your patrons. Bonzu Pippinpadalopsodopolis is what Aang called himself when they were trying to sneak into Omashu.
The Third!
Uh, it's Pippenpaddlopsicopolis I believe
@@gabrielstroup I always heard it as Pibbenpebble-opsikoppolis
My problem with pitch correction is that they use it on people who don't need it. Somehow, the industry came to think every single pitch needs to be right "in the pocket". It removes all the life and humanity out of the performance, and everyone sounds like robot. I'm especially concerned about it's use in kid's shows; children are growing up surrounded by the lifeless robotic sound of heavy pitch correction, and it could create a feedback loop resulting in generations of people who just don't know what a human singing voice sounds like.
It's cheaper than months in a studio. Studio time is very expensive. We try to get a passionate soulful performance as many times as possible, and if its slightly off we fix it rather than try to recreate it perfectly in pitch. There are accidental magic moments that are recorded from every instrument that are too good to pass up. Something that would never have been consciously written as the artist (or songwriter) was developing the song. I've seen these make an entire song sooooo much better. I think this way is vastly better than the alternative. To summarize: It allows more creative magical moments to happen, while still being affordable.
The story of technology. It giveth, but it always taketh away more.
As someone who really loves the old film musicals, I really wouldn't mind if actors were dubbed by professional singers, especially if they were actually credited for their role. Like I find it weird the whole need for well known film/tv actors to be able to sing really well, when their skill and talent lies more with their acting than singing or dancing. My brother has been through drama school, so I'm well aware that the requirement for singing, dancing and acting as the three core skills still remain, but I would rather watch a film where the singing was really beautiful (even with the aid of pitch correction or auto-tune) than something that sounds so artificial and fake because they're having to overcompensate and fix on-set singing. Like it's a film, it's not the West End, I will not curl into a ball and weep because the singing was recorded properly in a studio.
I agree. The term Triple Threat has all but fallen out of common use because it's become more of an expectation than something exceptional.
Agreed. Hiring triple threats would be the ideal, but if you can't/don't, I'd rather they just be dubbed and/or doubled. Let's be honest, it's the polished nature that makes old movie musicals so enjoyable.
@@drifter_d I also wouldn't mind if Hollywood did hire actual Broadway/West End talent for their films, but I'm fully aware that even hugely successful musical actors who haven't broken into film or TV are basically considered nobodies. But it's why I keep returning to My Fair Lady, West Side Story, etc because the music and singing are still beautiful. I don't fancy listening to Amanda Seyfried warble her way through a Heart full of Love or Taylor Swift doing a half hearted version of Macavity!
I curled up in a ball and wept, though mostly laughed when I saw Les Mis.
@Allan Tidgwell exactly. They always claim they cast the best person for the role but no, they cast the best *famous* person. In the case of Les Mis there were several people even in small roles in the same movie that would've been able to play Javert as least as well and sing much better than Russell Crowe. People I've seen play the role on stage. Now people might say: stage acting is different from film acting. That is true, but that didn't deter anyone in the case of Samantha Barks, who clearly showed that it can be done.
my little “fun” encounter with real-time pitch correction is when during my high schools production of Rent, the sound guy tried to pitch correct the singers on the last chord of Voicemail #6, an a capella round between four singers. For some reason, he pitched up one of the girls almost a whole half-step up, which really confused the other three girls because they can hear what she was actually singing and were trying to tune to that, but also hearing what was coming through the speakers, so ultimately they sounded a lot worse than if they hadn’t been pitch corrected at all.
This crap happens in high schools? I feel very old and very nauseous all of a sudden. High school theater is the last place to try live artifice.
@@argentpuck it was a last resort because they were really really struggling to be in tune, but it totally flopped :|
Ouch. Sounds like hell for everyone involved. High school is stressful enough, but live on stage? With no idea to match the what the girl is actually singing or what's coming out the speakers? Anxiety attacks for all!
@@teelaso So the problem was casting then?
@@1FISH no, they were all really outstanding singers and actresses, that one part was just difficult for them. i had heard them nail it maybe once in rehearsal, but not consistently
“No neckbeard, it’s an Effect” Dammm Sideways
This gives me flashbacks to the 2000s when even Imogen Heap was not safe from the people who just hated everything that sounded even remotely like Auto-Tune. It's funny because as someone who has experience with the plugin, it's actually not this magic button that just makes you sound good. You actually would have to be hyper-aware of your pitch/key, especially if you are using it live.
It's really nice to hear T-Pain sing. I've never listened to his music, and people always just told me he couldn't really sing, and I had no reason not to believe them. I just thought his voice modulation sounded cool and it was a nice way to turn a weakness into a strength.
Now that I know he's got the smoothest natural voice I've ever heard? cool
In my opinion music is an art, not a sport. There’s no such thing as ‘cheating’, because the only thing that matters is how it sounds.
That being said, if pitch correction becomes too much of a crutch, then finding good art will be harder and harder.
Right? I want to experience the highest fidelity realization of the artistic vision, not measure the skill level of the performers. Whatever tools help the intent come to fruition true to vision, go for it. It creates opportunity for more people's visions to be realized when there are more tools available to take a project from A to Z.
imo music is art, but preforming music is a sport.
I mean for example, when an artist uses other materials than paint brush, paint, and white space, it is still an painting. Whether they used airspray, sponge, shoe, coffee or whatevs, the output is still a painting.
@@SirRebrl yea exactly. Also I especially hate when people mention autotune as an argument against someone like Travis Scott.
He’s a rapper, he isn’t trying to show off his vocals anyways
@@squibble311 ok no
Alot of people complain about Owl City too. It never hits them that his music is technically classified as EDM, and usually EDM artists auto-tune for the effect, because it fits with their music.
imma casually slide in here and add that Adam Young (the one guy who does owl city) originally wanted to get someone else to do vocals for his music, but he couldn't find anyone, so he made do with his own voice.
I'm more concerned that Owl City is the dollar store version of The Postal Service.
I used to make props for theater and sometimes musical theater and the sound guys always got it the worst. But the Idea of a "too perfect" performance has been bleeding over into other industries. For many years after theater i helped make custom jewlery and accessories using the same skills from theater and more and more we got comments from clinets saying "Oh i dont like this its too perfect it looks fake or cheap" And often when they said this i realized i had the same kinda thought bias. Its the back lash against "plastic perfect" that is fueling the bespoke or "handmade" jewlery trends because the "rawness" means to the buyer a human with hands made this not a machine in china. And its very much the same as the auto tune thing. 99.9 of jewelers use some kind of machine or power tools. Those that dont are either doing something for a youtube channel, are historians keeping old techniques alive, or are doing it for millions of dollars a piece because it takes forever, has a high margin of error, and is largely impossible to replicate a piece to the same level at a later date.
"You can't sing and dance at the same time"
Broadway: *offended noises*
Ordinarily, broadway singers will pause their dancing to sing instead whilst there are background dancers behind them/they will pause their singing for a dance break. There may be times when actors /are/ singing and dancing, but it probably wouldnt be long enough for them to lose their breath
@@kenneltrained8850 Its actually a pretty sweet magic trick. Ten people are dancing, then one stops to sing, and you're looking at all the dancers still and it feels like the singer is still one of them.
@@kenneltrained8850 Fair. XD
@@Saurawr it really is pretty cool! I've seen a fair few live performances and its kind of surreal when you notice that the singer isn't dancing! Really makes you appreciate the magic of theater, lol :)
god I hate the “____ noises” meme
Thank GOD someone is finally talking about this. I see so many comments everywhere about how "nobody makes real music anymore, it's all fake and autotuned" or "their voice is better without autotune :(" or "they don't need autotune, they always sound amazing". It's exhausting having to explain this concept to so many people. Now maybe I'll just link them this video lmao
Blaming T-Pain for using Autotune and claiming it's because he can't sing is like saying Harry Potter uses magic because he's bad at being a Muggle.
@@SalumarLP I think it’s
More like saying Harry Potter uses a wand because he’s bad at using magic.
I'd honestly rather hear a pretty good performance that had some slight but noticeable flaws, than one that has been manipulated, regardless of whether I can tell or not.
They aren't wrong though. In essence you are just excusing the lack of actual talent. There is no explaining this concept because it is founded on delivering a fake performance and deceiving your fans.
@@crfan4232 not really. Producing a music requires talent not just in singing but also in composing and engineering the audio to sound the way it is meant to be or to sound like an authentic live and raw performance. Nowadays, raw untouched music is rare in mainstream media but you can always ask for someone to sing for you.
as an artist/producer, this was a TREAT learning about how vocal editing is done in movies. appreciate your notes here!!
This whole thing reminds me of the Would You Rather with BTS where they asked would they have rather have a mic that makes their vocals perfect or shoes that make their dancing perfect and Yoongi said he wanted the shoes since someone already invented the mic.
why have I never seen this? I adore him and how blunt he can be omg
BTS don't get enough credit for their artistry and knowledge of music, so I appreciate this quote so much
@@lauxantilles Not enough credit? They get way too much credit for the crap they come up with if they even write their own songs. And there you have one of them saying clearly that he doesn't give a shit about singing well since "his mic" does it for him. Woah, what amazing talent and knowledge of music xD
@@gustru2078 Yeah because he’s not a vocalist in the band- he’s a rapper… plus, he’s not saying his mic does it for him, he’s saying “hey, auto-tune exists”
@@lauxantilles Knowledge of music? How is that knowledge of music? It's the most basic obvious concept. What do they know about music or any of its rules and concepts etc.
I love how when the interviewer asks him to sing, T-Pain doesn't even clear his throat or anything, he just jumps right into it as if he were talking normally
Oh so this is the musical version of "digital art is not a real art" and "you just press a button and computer makes an art for you".
kind of... i think that definition fits more in Electronic Music (back in the day obviously)
@@dR0L0b Not even electrical engineers would look at old school analog synths and come to the conclusion that it's anything but art though.
the "special effects magic button"
Yep and the argument against that is even if it's digital, you still need artistic skills to make digital art.
Not really? He doesn’t complain of the use of autotune for artistic purposes (cher, Tpain, daft punk) nor the practice of making music 100% digitally. He comments of the use of melodine and how some artists act as if they are being 100% raw.
A more accurate comparison would be people using filters and people acting as if it is a natural photo
100%. I've been using a phrase in my own musical dissection to talk about stuff like auto-tune, "tools in a toolbox." There are a lot of choices that go into the creation of a song across all 3 crafts that are a part of it; composition, performance, and production. And I repeat myself so often just to hammer it home that none of these options/choices are bad. Layers, noise, auto-tune (the tool), compression, dissonance, whatever. I hope to get people thinking critically about *how* things are used rather than dismiss them entirely. And this video is the other side of the coin to that conversation, that sometimes these choices, these decisions, these tools being used (pitch correction, here) are done in an invisible manner.
I really wish people would watch some tutorials about producing vocal tracks, just to get a little bit of an understanding just how much work goes into making those vocals on the radio sound crisp and unfiltered. I was surprised to find out that even "natural" sounding vocal tracks have so much work done on them from compression, de-essers, EQ, multitracking for width, and yeah pitch correction. Like you said at the end, there isn't any magic button to make a bad performance sound good. What we constantly hear is raw perfection and no one seems to be upset about that. On the flip side, stuff like maxing out auto-tune can be used aesthetically. And oddly enough, some people love that. You mentioned T-Pain getting flack for using it but Will.I.Am is seemingly held in high regard for his use of maxing out pitch correction and getting that robotic voice.
"No one said a thing about her performance in Noah" Well no one saw Noah.
My thoughts exactly
I did! And i loved it! In the scene he was showing made me cry and i felt all the emotion coming from her! In the scene she is Noah from the arcs adopted daughter who just had twin daughters which where his biolagical son and noah wants to kill them because in the first place he didnt want her pregnant because he wanted for humans to end because of their sin he had previously told her that if they were boys he would let them survive but if they were girls he would kill them... Thats why she was crying and holding her kids. It was so sad and emotional!
Also why would they? It's not a musical as far as I am aware of, and it's just a woman singing to her kid right? And she's way back in bible days. Why would anyone expect any sort of polished performance from that character in the first place it doesn't fit with the movie. Unless I just totally misunderstood what he was saying there. I've never seen Noah and I'm sort of guessing from that tiny clip
I think I've seen it before
i did, just to spite the people who said it isn't realistic to the bible
bitch, it's a artistic work, if it ain't different it's boring
Boy do I love his very accurate references to makeup. He just drops the "it is like nude makeup" like it's nothing.
It would be more like of a beauty influencer did a live performance of her world-renowned skin-care routine, only for it to turn out it was just thick makeup the whole time.
@@williamhood7548 , better comparison would be post-shot photoshopping.
because it is nothing lol
@@whatskraken3886 ???
@@gildanonofyabiznez6430 literally everyone who is anyone knows what nude makeup is
Whats weird is T Pain has a beautiful voice naturally, very full and resonant. The auto tune was an artistic choice, not a crutch
Exactly, people complained about when Taylor Swift used autotune on her Reputation album, while she was going for a style, a hip-pop kind of Idea for a lot of the songs. And does that mean she's a bad singer? Hell no it doesn't. There's examples of her singing without mics and she sounds so godly. And like someone else said, a lot of times these singers ARE great and don't need it. Someone else I saw said that sometimes voice modulation can take out beautiful aspects of a natural voice. That makes me feel great about my voice, as it is not perfect but unique and only thanks to that, and melodic as heck when at it's best
Yeah, keep rationalising it to yourself why you like extremely simplitic and unskilled music.
@@piotrmalewski8178 did you watch the video?
@@piotrmalewski8178 No one will judge if you just say "I don't like music that sounds electronic" or "I don't like that kind of style" but you had to go and insult a musical style. Where's your platinum record, then? Where do you teach musical theory? If you're going to have that hot of a take you better have some toes in the water.
@@quirkyblackenby I did. The author might be right when it comes to artistic choices, but the sole existence of autotune as a tool that is used to actually fix someone's poor performance shows the criticism has a ground.
A good performer who regularly trains, doesn't make errors, even when singing pieces much longer and more difficult to perform than an average pop song.
When Sideways was explaining pitch correction vs autotune I was thinking "So it's like makeup. Something a beauty influencer does vs me dabbing on some concealer." THEN HE USED THAT EXACT METAPHOR.
I think the reason why people immediately think "autotune is evil" or cheating, is because we are fascinated by talent. If we see someone perform live and hear their voice as is comes out of their mouth for real and it's amazing, that's really the best thing to experience. We love experiencing human achievements, that's why the book of world records exists... but when we hear a stellar live performance and are enamoured by an amazing voice and later find out that it was altered to sound better, we feel cheated.
What I find that infuriates me is it does take skill to be the mixer/sound tech, but because all it looks like is button presses they think it is easy. If we see a bad voice correction, that’s on the tech, not the singer as much. We need to learn that “auto tune” is like makeup or like touching up a photo. A talent that try to emphasize another talents features
Being a musician, I find myself more and more loathing the word "talent." People don't realize the insane amount of practice it takes to be a good musician, no matter what kind of genre you perform. But people will point at child prodigies or live performers and say, "look how talented they are." What we should be saying is, "look how hard they worked."
JayFolipurba
Also because it actually is a type of cheating.
@@AddBowIfGirl did you watch the video?
@@MasterSkyrim1000 I meant the colloquial use of the word talent, of course it's hours and hours of practice to become an Elton John or Ariana grande, but they have an inert talent to even get as far as they have with practice.
Ke$ha has been thrown under the bus for nearly a decade, I'm so happy that the public perception of her is turning around.
Are you telling me Jack Black actually does need a microphone and his voice isn't that powerful?
He doesn’t, he’s just that majestic of a man.
HE DOES NOT NEED
Baddle Acks A MICROWAVE
HIS VOICE IS FUCKIN’ POWERFUUUUUUUUUULL!
@@TheMilhouseExperience AJJAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! sorry.
HE DID NOT MEANNN TO BLOW YOUR MINDah.
I just saw Kesha live on her most recent tour. She can absolutely sing. Honestly, she's a much more incredible singer than people give her credit for, so I just assume people who say otherwise probably haven't heard any of her music past 2013.
Hey Sideways! Three suggestions for you.
1. IN-DEPTH analysis of the How To Train Your Dragon soundtrack. I know you've already done a video on this, but it deserves more detail and recognition.
2. A video on the Pirates of the Caribbean soundtrack. It's surprising how you haven't gotten to this iconic score, and its got a lot to praise and investigate.
3. Undertale. I don't even own the game (don't whine in the replies people) and the music is so riddled with leitmotifs and musical genius.
Keep up the amazing work!
i've been wanting him to do a video on undertale for SO long!!
his HTTYD video has links to in-depth analysis videos (by other people) of the soundtrack
If you're going to mention Undertale's leitmotifs we may as well throw Homestuck in there too! Same creative team, even some shared score!
I know they're already a bunch of analysis on the internet for this games soundtrack but one coming from sideways would be a DREAM
I love the Pirates scores. I haven't listened to the fifth one, but the other ones are pretty great
As a massive fan of Daft Punk, I actually really liked your makeup analogy, because make up in reality is as much as part of a look as auto tune/ pitch correction can be a part of the music
Omg the makeup metaphor is so spot on. People (mostly men) will take about how much they hate women who wear a ton of makeup, and don't realize that the vast majority of women they think are beautiful are wearing a lot of makeup, it's just subtle. It's to cover up perceived flaws, not to add to a look.
That reminds of people complaining that Lady Gaga wears too much make up. But in A star is born she looks so good because she is natural without make up. No she ist just wearing more subtle mke up.
As a woman who never uses make up, while I think there can be some problems with make up, "lying to men" is not one of them lmao. Why do people think it's for them and not for the person wearing it
Plus you then think you look unusually horrible when you wake up in the morning, because you're so used to seeing at least concealer and brows on other people's faces that you don't have a good idea of what average people look like. And you think you're a bad musician who can't sing in tune, when actually the human voice isn't made for perfection and even the most highly trained virtuosi make mistakes on stage. It's a great comparison.
Northflower Because these people are shortsighted and don’t think about the mentality as opposed to the literal face value. It’s a bit of a fallacy that, since you can’t see your face most of the time you wear your makeup, you wouldn’t care what it looks like. Maybe that’s their ignorant bliss, but for the rest of us we know that’s utterly false because _of course_ you care about your appearance. And, with the power of brush on colours, you also want to portray your personal taste and style.
With good makeup skills, people can remove skin conditions, aging effects, tiredness, change the shape of facial features, change contours, shadows and even tones. It's like looking at before and after pictures, with the person looking like two different people, that's the male complaint about makeup magic.
Does the average person go to that extant, no.
My father worked in the production side of the music industry for nearly 20 years and he explained it as essentially being for artists who were basically drained from spending hours and hours in a studio and might miss a note or be slightly off-key or something, so instead of just waiting a few days for them to recover, they could just "grab" the note and pull it back on pitch. You wouldn't notice it unless it was something done deliberately.
He also told me about a company that developed a similar system for use in live performances for "power signers" who were notorious for holding high notes and drawing them out - while touring and performing multiple shows a night they were often exhausted, so sometimes they needed a bit of help keeping those insane high notes on pitch.
Considering the first Beatles album was recorded in one day you can REALLY hear the strain during twist and shout.
If you want to watch a live performance with no enhancements to the singing, nor any lip-syncing. Watch Eurovision Song Contest. Because it is a competition, there are rules. Two rules are; all singing must be live performed by the people on stage, and; no vocal effects. It must be the original audio. - This can be confirmed by some performances due to mistakes happening, or when that audience member stole the microphone. - But do note that all music aside from the singing can be pre-recorded, and it often is. The vast majority of the people on stage playing instruments are faking it.
actually all people on stage in Eurovision with instruments are fake playing, it's a rule too that they are not allowed to use their instruments live.
another fun fact, in the really old days they had an orchestra playing the live music. but that's a time long past.
Lol I remember when RHCP played the Superbowl and they wouldn't let them actually play (they had to use a backing track), so out of spite the band members unplugged their instruments during the performance
ok but the songs are crap tho
or go to a non pop concert, punk,metal,country, indie acoustic.
sabaton live is something to watch, there's a clip in one of the songs where joakim stumbles and straight up misses a line, and another one where he was trying hard not to laugh while singing.
Pitch correction is like using CGI in movies. No one notices good CGI; look at Parasite(2019).
Whoa whoa whoa, there was cgi in parasite? Where?
@@kyletowers9662 absolutely everywhere. Mostly used to fill in backgrounds the sets didn't cover.
As someone once said, "If the CGI is good, no one will notice it, but if they do notice it, it becomes bad." ( Cough cough berserk 2016 and 17)
Semiquavers Musical Notations I heard that on a corridor video once
@@kyletowers9662 A lot of the backgrounds environments were CGI.
Now I wanna know what a falling tree sounds like autotuned
See I personally love it when the artist live performance strays slightly from the studio version and you get to hear those intricacies such as heavy breathing, vocal instability or sometimes off key notes.
It really displays the passion, rawness behind such tracks which aren't always best conveyed in studio version.
I feel like that can go either or. The mistakes themselves don’t demonstrate the passion, but the intention. You don’t need mistakes to be “real”
The thing that always bugged me about the Milli Vanilli skip is that they could have just said yeah we were lipsyncing ourselves pre-recorded. It in no way revealed that they didn't sing the original.
And the way the audio skips sounds like it was supposed to repeat that way.
I think it was more the straw that broke the camel's back: they'd been accused of not being the actual singers for a hot minute already if I remember the story correctly.
Also in the 90s just lipsyncing even your own stuff would not have been acceptable to consumers anyway (regardless on if it was widespread by that point behind the scenes) so they were pretty well screwed anyway
@@MixMasterLar yeah thats true, I don't really recall anyone back then openly lipsyncing
@@MixMasterLar the issue wasnt even that they were CAUGHT lip syncing - people really didnt care much when it first happened, though because of their HEAVY accents people already did doubt they were the ones singing. the issue was that not long after, the actual singer(s) came forward. i think if the singers hadn't done that then the ruse could've gone on for longer. then they tried to sing live and both of them kind of sucked so that solidified the end of milli vanilli.
what sucks is they were kind of taken advantage of by their producer. theres a really good video about them by black femininity tv, i totally recommend it :)
I'm just shocked people were surprised they were lip syncing. Milli Vanilli was produced by Frank Farian who first started with Boney M who was famous for lip syncing live.
Thank you for giving Kesha the credit she deserves.
Find the video Keisha without autotune. She can't sing a lick, just screeches.
@@gevansmd1 he literally put Kesha’s live performance of Praying in the video
@@gevansmd1 did you watch the video lmao
@@gevansmd1 so you missed the live singing they had in the video? Especially given why she made that song. Kesha needs to be left alone....I've been where she was in regards to the abuse she suffered; THAT is why people think she can't sing.
@@mbc264 autotune is also applied to live performances.
"I can't believe your eyelids aren't actually blue!"
Yep, fair analogy.
Fair analogy, but the criticisms of both still hold up. Some women wear makeup for the artistry of it, while most wear it to disguise their imperfections. Some artists use auto-tune for the effect it has on their art, while most use it to disguise their imperfections. In both cases there is a line--and that line is usually on a case-by-case basis--where you cross from fixing a small issue to outright lies, and society only likes being lied to when they don't know it's happening.
You forgot this /s
No, not fair analogy. No one belives that eyelids are naturaly blue. No one expects eyelids to be naturaly blue. He doesnt understand what makeup is. Or to be more precisly what the difference between makeup and a mask is. Makeup >enhances< the natural beauty. A mask hides the unwanted parts and reconstructs the face completly.
It doesnt matter if someone tunes some vocals on his album. If you need tuning during a live concert then your live concerts arent worth visiting!
@@KristalBlut exactly
Today's music sounds like Mimi from the Drew Carrey show.
I have a family member who listened to a production I made. She heard the part of it where I was intentionally using Autotune and got nit-picky telling me I was covering my voice up, when in reality, 99% of all the music she listens to is mixed in a production studio with pitch correction.
sideways: T-Pain is a better singer than you or I will ever be
me: *scoffs*
T-Pain: *does that thing*
me: oh, he's right
Except he's not.
@@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 ok but I don't know you but millions of people know and love T-Pain and his work.
I am not impressed. I am not even interested. I just don't take that people who never heard me sing make up claims about my skills and their limits.
@@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 he’s half joking, i don’t understand why you wasted energy to respond to this comment when you know any statement like that isn’t said as a fact
@@hans-joachimbierwirth4727 Dude. Come down from your high horse and don't get mad about what a guy on the internet may or may not have said about your singing. He wasn't talking to you specifically.