8 ms·

Ya ya ya. I am lorde. Ya ya ya. (I think they missed a trick not using Randy Marsh[0] for their marketing) All jokes aside, I will throw serious money at the f

Ya ya ya. I am lorde. Ya ya ya. (I think they missed a trick not using Randy Marsh[0] for their marketing) All jokes aside, I will throw serious money at the first streaming service that implements an 'autotuned' tag, and lets me filter anything tagged with it out of my stream. Like, $100 a month. Maybe more. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkMJ5GSC37g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkMJ5GSC37g

mjr00 4y ago
> I will throw serious money at the first streaming service that implements an 'autotuned' tag, and lets me filter anything tagged with it out of my stream. Well, I hope you don't like listening to any music made after ~2010, then. Melodyne is completely standard for any modern vocal processing, in all genres of music.
- boomskats 4y ago
  > in all genres of music I get where you're coming from. I remember Celemony announcing their polyphonic tuning engine a little over a decade ago, and remember buying it as soon as it came out and re-tuning a load of Imogen Heap tunes and loving it, in something like Reaper v2. I know how prevalent Melodyne is, I know the commercial and production related justifications for its use. But I also know for a fact that this is not the case 'in all genres of music'. Sometimes, I want to listen exclusively to music with real vocals. I love the first CHVRCHES album, it's one of my favourite albums of the last decade. As it happens, it took me ages, a couple of years, to figure out that the reason I liked it as much as I did was the lack of autotune. I (ironically) figured this out when they released their second album which _did_ utilise autotune. I never made it all the way through listening to that second album.
  - mjr00 4y ago
    I guarantee that the music you're listening to that has "real vocals" has used Melodyne, you just don't notice it. Even if the artist themselves thinks they didn't use it, if they worked with a professional mixing/mastering engineer, they likely did vocal correction without the singer's knowledge. You may as well say "I don't listen to music that uses EQ" or "I don't listen to music that uses compressors."
    - boomskats 4y ago
      > You may as well say "I don't listen to music that uses EQ" or "I don't listen to music that uses compressors." Not the same as either of those things. You might as well be arguing that I'm claiming that volume knobs shouldn't exist. Pick an equivalent like photography. In the photography world, EQ is like a fill light. A compressor you could compare to a polarising filter. Autotune (or drum quant) though, is like photoshopping. Removing all of the skin blemishes and imperfections at best, and at worst and more often than not, it's fake disproportionate waist and ass booty enhancement.
      - mjr00 4y ago
        This doesn't make any sense. Vocal compression alters the source signal significantly more than pitch correction, generally. Like getting -10, even -20dB of compression across multiple compressors (some of which are "character" compressors like the 1176 or LA2A, so doing more than just dynamics) is not uncommon. Every vocal runs through a de-esser (a specialized compressor, really) that removes sibilance, which is much more analogous to "removing all of the skin blemishes and imperfections".
        boomskats 4y ago
        It does make sense. Compression is a uniformly applied filter. It's like a contrast adjustment or colour curve. It also affects amplitude only. (It can also be done really badly - I'm not a huge fan of its abuse in the loudness wars, but that's not what we're talking about here.) Compression is an effect that's applied. Selective tuning, like quantisation, is the result of an _interactive, selective edit_. It's the equivalent of photoshopping out the spots on my ass and making my hips a little narrower. Sure I could have not had that ingrown asshair, and maybe my hips would be narrower if I worked out. But the reality is different. (Also IMHO ratio is a better single indicator of severity of compression, rather than dB)
        mjr00 4y ago
        If you're seriously interested in this topic, you should look into some vocal processing courses or videos on YouTube, because you are quite misinformed on some of this stuff. > Compression is a uniformly applied filter. It's like a contrast adjustment or colour curve. It also affects amplitude only. Very incorrect. Many famous compressors are known for the color (saturation, technically speaking) that they add to the sound. Hell, some are known for how badly they destroy the sound, like the Level-Loc. Analog-style compressors (which most engineers still use for vocals, in particular) also react very differently to different input gains, so it's not a uniformly applied filter. > (Also IMHO ratio is a better single indicator of severity of compression, rather than dB) It is not. Talking in terms of total gain reduction is more indicative of the effect on the sound. Using a 100:1 ratio (in practice, a limiter, something like Pro-L on Safe mode) is very common on vocals to catch quick peaks, but only catching a few dB of gain reduction. You won't notice that a limiter is being used on vocals this way. But you would notice if I used a 2:1 ratio on a vocal and set the threshold all the way down, crushing the dynamic range. You also can't talk about ratios when talking about using compressors in serial, which again, is standard vocal processing.
klodolph 4y ago
Fact is, people say this, but when artists actually release music that uses no autotuning, it tends to be less popular. Hardcore fans will say “release your next album without autotuning” but when the album actually comes out, those hardcore fans aren’t supporting it. It’s very difficult to tell if autotuning is used, if it is used well.
- boomskats 4y ago
  That's an interesting defence of autotune, but I don't think it's relevant to my comment, which clearly talks about my own personal preference. I don't want to listen to artists who use autotune. I _do_ want to listen to artists who don't. I know that there definitely is a set of artists who explicitly don't use it, who are more concerned with accurately expressing their creative intent and musical virtuosity than they are with gaining popularity and mass appeal. What I am saying is that I would like to be able to consciously choose to only listen to and support those musicians, and I will gladly pay a disproportionate amount for it. Anecdotally, I know for a fact that I am not the only one who feels this way. Also btw - > when artists actually release music that uses no autotuning, it tends to be less popular Normally when you make a statement like this on HN I'd expect to see a citation or reference to where that statement came from.
  - Orcastrap 4y ago
    imagine thinking you can actually notice light autotune (let alone melodyne!) use in a recording
    - boomskats 4y ago
      You also just _completely_ missed my point. I want to be able to choose to consciously support artists who don't use autotune. I want to be recommended and discover new artists, who consciously don't use autotune. I want to be able to choose to listen to real vocals as a genre. I want that choice.
      - Orcastrap 4y ago
ilikeitdark 4y ago
Seriously, that was complete torture watching that video. I thought for some stupid reason it might be interesting. Wrong.
_chu1 4y ago
Autotune also in my opinion sets unrealistic goals for people getting into singing
- adzm 4y ago
  On the other hand, auto tune is great for people to get into making songs without having the greatest voice.
witherk 4y ago
I'm sure there will always be music made with varying levels technology. Seems like it will always be the case that any technology past that made in one's childhood will be the cutoff for some people.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
agentwiggles 4y ago
This is one of the funniest clips from the show I can think of, the subversion of expectation from his initial clip to a legit Lorde sounding song is so funny to me.
613style 4y ago
I think you're underestimating how subtle and ubiquitous modern autotuning is. The video here is an extreme example of a very broad category of effects. In reality, almost every professional recording you hear uses autotune in the same way that almost every professional photograph you see uses color correction. Most people don't notice it most of the time (despite most people believing they always notice it). An alternative you've also heard extremely often is a singer recording the same line 100 times, then producers going through each word (or each syllable) to cherry-pick the sample where it was most on-pitch and blend them together. Neither one of these represents the singer's real ability (whatever that even means), but both can be unnoticeable by 99.99% of the population when applied skillfully.
- chmod775 4y ago
  > almost every professional recording you hear uses autotune That seems a bit too general. If we narrowed that down to a few popular music genres I would probably subscribe to it. Plenty of solo artists wouldn't be caught dead using autotune or melodyne or whatever (outside of using it for effect/intentional distortion). When being an exceptional singer is your entire brand, you don't want to show up with training wheels.
- boomskats 4y ago
  > The video here is an extreme example of a very broad category of effects. I mean, it's a joke, it's South Park. It's why I said 'jokes aside' in my next comment. However, if you're into jokes and such, I'd highly recommend that entire episode.

mjr00 4y ago

> I will throw serious money at the first streaming service that implements an 'autotuned' tag, and lets me filter anything tagged with it out of my stream. Well, I hope you don't like listening to any music made after ~2010, then. Melodyne is completely standard for any modern vocal processing, in all genres of music.

boomskats 4y ago
> in all genres of music I get where you're coming from. I remember Celemony announcing their polyphonic tuning engine a little over a decade ago, and remember buying it as soon as it came out and re-tuning a load of Imogen Heap tunes and loving it, in something like Reaper v2. I know how prevalent Melodyne is, I know the commercial and production related justifications for its use. But I also know for a fact that this is not the case 'in all genres of music'. Sometimes, I want to listen exclusively to music with real vocals. I love the first CHVRCHES album, it's one of my favourite albums of the last decade. As it happens, it took me ages, a couple of years, to figure out that the reason I liked it as much as I did was the lack of autotune. I (ironically) figured this out when they released their second album which _did_ utilise autotune. I never made it all the way through listening to that second album.
- mjr00 4y ago
  I guarantee that the music you're listening to that has "real vocals" has used Melodyne, you just don't notice it. Even if the artist themselves thinks they didn't use it, if they worked with a professional mixing/mastering engineer, they likely did vocal correction without the singer's knowledge. You may as well say "I don't listen to music that uses EQ" or "I don't listen to music that uses compressors."
  - boomskats 4y ago
    > You may as well say "I don't listen to music that uses EQ" or "I don't listen to music that uses compressors." Not the same as either of those things. You might as well be arguing that I'm claiming that volume knobs shouldn't exist. Pick an equivalent like photography. In the photography world, EQ is like a fill light. A compressor you could compare to a polarising filter. Autotune (or drum quant) though, is like photoshopping. Removing all of the skin blemishes and imperfections at best, and at worst and more often than not, it's fake disproportionate waist and ass booty enhancement.
    - mjr00 4y ago
      This doesn't make any sense. Vocal compression alters the source signal significantly more than pitch correction, generally. Like getting -10, even -20dB of compression across multiple compressors (some of which are "character" compressors like the 1176 or LA2A, so doing more than just dynamics) is not uncommon. Every vocal runs through a de-esser (a specialized compressor, really) that removes sibilance, which is much more analogous to "removing all of the skin blemishes and imperfections".
      - boomskats 4y ago
        It does make sense. Compression is a uniformly applied filter. It's like a contrast adjustment or colour curve. It also affects amplitude only. (It can also be done really badly - I'm not a huge fan of its abuse in the loudness wars, but that's not what we're talking about here.) Compression is an effect that's applied. Selective tuning, like quantisation, is the result of an _interactive, selective edit_. It's the equivalent of photoshopping out the spots on my ass and making my hips a little narrower. Sure I could have not had that ingrown asshair, and maybe my hips would be narrower if I worked out. But the reality is different. (Also IMHO ratio is a better single indicator of severity of compression, rather than dB)
        mjr00 4y ago
        If you're seriously interested in this topic, you should look into some vocal processing courses or videos on YouTube, because you are quite misinformed on some of this stuff. > Compression is a uniformly applied filter. It's like a contrast adjustment or colour curve. It also affects amplitude only. Very incorrect. Many famous compressors are known for the color (saturation, technically speaking) that they add to the sound. Hell, some are known for how badly they destroy the sound, like the Level-Loc. Analog-style compressors (which most engineers still use for vocals, in particular) also react very differently to different input gains, so it's not a uniformly applied filter. > (Also IMHO ratio is a better single indicator of severity of compression, rather than dB) It is not. Talking in terms of total gain reduction is more indicative of the effect on the sound. Using a 100:1 ratio (in practice, a limiter, something like Pro-L on Safe mode) is very common on vocals to catch quick peaks, but only catching a few dB of gain reduction. You won't notice that a limiter is being used on vocals this way. But you would notice if I used a 2:1 ratio on a vocal and set the threshold all the way down, crushing the dynamic range. You also can't talk about ratios when talking about using compressors in serial, which again, is standard vocal processing.

klodolph 4y ago

Fact is, people say this, but when artists actually release music that uses no autotuning, it tends to be less popular. Hardcore fans will say “release your next album without autotuning” but when the album actually comes out, those hardcore fans aren’t supporting it. It’s very difficult to tell if autotuning is used, if it is used well.

boomskats 4y ago
That's an interesting defence of autotune, but I don't think it's relevant to my comment, which clearly talks about my own personal preference. I don't want to listen to artists who use autotune. I _do_ want to listen to artists who don't. I know that there definitely is a set of artists who explicitly don't use it, who are more concerned with accurately expressing their creative intent and musical virtuosity than they are with gaining popularity and mass appeal. What I am saying is that I would like to be able to consciously choose to only listen to and support those musicians, and I will gladly pay a disproportionate amount for it. Anecdotally, I know for a fact that I am not the only one who feels this way. Also btw - > when artists actually release music that uses no autotuning, it tends to be less popular Normally when you make a statement like this on HN I'd expect to see a citation or reference to where that statement came from.
- Orcastrap 4y ago
  imagine thinking you can actually notice light autotune (let alone melodyne!) use in a recording
  - boomskats 4y ago
    You also just _completely_ missed my point. I want to be able to choose to consciously support artists who don't use autotune. I want to be recommended and discover new artists, who consciously don't use autotune. I want to be able to choose to listen to real vocals as a genre. I want that choice.
    - Orcastrap 4y ago

ilikeitdark 4y ago

Seriously, that was complete torture watching that video. I thought for some stupid reason it might be interesting. Wrong.

_chu1 4y ago

Autotune also in my opinion sets unrealistic goals for people getting into singing

adzm 4y ago
On the other hand, auto tune is great for people to get into making songs without having the greatest voice.

witherk 4y ago

I'm sure there will always be music made with varying levels technology. Seems like it will always be the case that any technology past that made in one's childhood will be the cutoff for some people.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

agentwiggles 4y ago

This is one of the funniest clips from the show I can think of, the subversion of expectation from his initial clip to a legit Lorde sounding song is so funny to me.

613style 4y ago

I think you're underestimating how subtle and ubiquitous modern autotuning is. The video here is an extreme example of a very broad category of effects. In reality, almost every professional recording you hear uses autotune in the same way that almost every professional photograph you see uses color correction. Most people don't notice it most of the time (despite most people believing they always notice it). An alternative you've also heard extremely often is a singer recording the same line 100 times, then producers going through each word (or each syllable) to cherry-pick the sample where it was most on-pitch and blend them together. Neither one of these represents the singer's real ability (whatever that even means), but both can be unnoticeable by 99.99% of the population when applied skillfully.

chmod775 4y ago
> almost every professional recording you hear uses autotune That seems a bit too general. If we narrowed that down to a few popular music genres I would probably subscribe to it. Plenty of solo artists wouldn't be caught dead using autotune or melodyne or whatever (outside of using it for effect/intentional distortion). When being an exceptional singer is your entire brand, you don't want to show up with training wheels.
boomskats 4y ago
> The video here is an extreme example of a very broad category of effects. I mean, it's a joke, it's South Park. It's why I said 'jokes aside' in my next comment. However, if you're into jokes and such, I'd highly recommend that entire episode.