> I'm not against Daft Punk. But, I can't stand to listen to very much rap after M.F. DOOM because it has all been infected by T-Pain. Why is overt use of auto

> I'm not against Daft Punk. But, I can't stand to listen to very much rap after M.F. DOOM because it has all been infected by T-Pain. Why is overt use of autotune a less valid artistic choice when T-Pain uses it than when Daft Punk uses it? > Thriller sold 70 million copies, Bat out of Hell (somehow) sold 43 million copies. That's on a different order of magnitude than what seems possible today. This is mostly due to the monumental changes in the sales model for music since those days. Sales suffered massively at the hands of iTunes and Spotify - there's little correlation with trends in the actual music. > I think part of what makes music interesting to listen to is the subtle imperfections and nonidealities. I think MIDI and the click track are part of the same problem as autotune... "Snap to grid" and a lot of what makes music interesting is just gone. There's nothing wrong with feeling that way, but I would be cautious of projecting your preferences onto the rest of the world. I think it's clear that many, many people enjoy music produced in this style. After all, someone living a century before us could make the exact same arguments decrying recorded music in favor of live performances. Who wants to listen to the same thing over and over again? The subtle variations and imperfections between live performances are what gives music color - do away with them and all we have is a cold, mechanical, unfeeling facsimile of proper music.