What a great video, Melisa! So well done. Funny at times, insightful, fair. Thank you very much for all the effort you put into it. I agree with you -- whenever you enter the territory of a fan's love for perhaps their favorite artist you're stepping into land riddled with mines. Emotion vs. fact, for starters, as you concisely named it. The image of the artist is crucial here, the qualities generally ascribed to him/her. I liked your conclusion -- that snobbery is the real enemy. It'd be interesting if it became Law that an artist *must* put a sticker or notice of some sort on their albums indicating if pitch correction had been used, and on which songs. And if you lied the fine would be BIG. That at least would solve the authenticity issue from the get-go. Detecting autotune....I feel like I'm pretty good at it, but I don't really know. Producers have probably become really good at subtly using it. Thanks again for this. I prefer my favorites to not use it. And if they do I see it as them admitting "I can no longer hit these notes reliably. I used to be able to but I can't anymore. But I want to present this song in its ideal form, since it's on record here, for posterity. But admittedly I needed a little help to get the pitch right on some notes."
What you're missing is that most people don't go to shows like the Sex Pistols, GWAR, Taylor Swift, etc to hear talented musicians, they go purely for the atmosphere and show. Their fans know they're lousy vocalists and/or musicians and they just want to party and enjoy the show. Bands like Nightwish, Disturbed, Lady Gaga, etc are sold to their fans as being talented musicians/vocalists, so they don't want to hear anything that indicates otherwise once they've become invested in them.
With respect my dude Im pretty sure I discussed at length that people don’t go to Taylor/SP/Britney/cher for chops but for the joy. But I think you’re right. Some artists are sold on and live and die by the fact that they’re very talented, and I don’t think autotune erases that, you know? That being said, music is so personal so who knows what’s the best foot forward on these productions. Thanks for watching 😄💪
I think the fallacy is the idea that using pitch correction/autotone means a vocalist isn't talented or highly skilled. It *can* be in some cases, but in most cases it's not. I think more people need to understand that
@@SoulSingerDiscovers The thing about autotune is that most outside the industry only hear of it when critics accuse artists of using it to discredit their talent... whether it's fair or not. So, even if you didn't intend your observation in that manner, that's most likely how the people making those comments heard it.
Thanks for that one, really appreciated. I do connect with David. And I don't mind if he is pitch corrected. Same with many singers. I can hear correction sometimes, but I'm sure there are many songs where I can't even guess it's there. What I don't like is that feeling I have with some older songs. I have a personal connection with them, and on some recent releases, I feel there is something changed. It might be just a feeling, it might be true. It might be pitch correction or just the way someone re-processed the track to make it ok for modern media. After all, streaming and vinyl sound different. But there is something I don't like when I feel it's not the same song anymore. I'm losing my connection, and it make me sad.
I really enjoyed this video. Good singers performers artists and writers can and should use whatever they like to make their music sound the way they want. If it hides a weakness then that's alright. If it is the equivalent of plastic surgery for the untalented, that's ok also. I mind this fuss when records released shamed drummers for having a metronome keeping time. Haters gonna hate. You're great, love all you do xx
Interesting take but I don't fully agree. I want to hear the true voice of an artist. Now i have no issue with sometimes using technology on the voice if it is for a particular effect (for instance playing a character within a song) in which case as a listener it is an honest use. Now if someone says they are snging "live" and they are not then to me they are conning the listener. If we are going down the route of it being normalised then i want the artist to say they have used it. I can then make a decision whether to buy their way of making music or someone who doesnt use it. To me there is a dishonesty about using autotune or pitch correction. At live shows i can handle a singer going out of tune or a singer saying upfront "i am choked up with the cold can you help me out tonight" as this is honest and as a fan or a music lover I can empathise and of course help out by singing loud as fuck in support. Some of my favourite gigs have been like that. Give me that any day over faking shit. Sorry to disagree with you but that is where I stand. If I went to a gig and found out the singer wasn't singing live I would never go see that artist again. I would also let mates know so they can decide whether to spend money on fakery.
@@madjock-ig5bv I can understand your point of view and I agree with the idea of hearing the true voice of an artist (whether that's a singer, guitarist, or a band as a whole). Where do you stand on other production techniques used in modern recordings? Things like compression and multitrack recording and layering? It's all used to "enhance" the art, much in the same way pitch correction is. And even demo recordings by modern bands will use some basic production techniques like that. What I'm saying is: unless you have someone who performs, produces, mixes, and masters the whole thing themselves, in which case the work they've created is their true voice, you won't ever really hear the true voice of an artist unless you see them live.
@@sVieira151 I am aware of lots of things that are done in a studio for a recording. If someone does a vocal and then it is used 2 or 3 times over itself I am still hearing the voice of the singer but just hearing more than 1 of them. It is obvious and still honest as it is indeed obvious. Even live I have no issue with backing vocals on a track (same with the very famous invisible keyboardist who appears with many rock and metal bands for the odd song), you can see and hear that it is recorded. However when it comes to vocals the singer should be singing live (especially onstage) as well as the musicians who should also be plugged in and playing live. There are quite a few smaller bands I see regularly who always tell folks "it is all live.... even the bum notes". I would rather that than fakery. One of the utter crimes going on at the moment is the way older recordings that had nothing wrong with the vocals are now being pitch corrected (the latest Queen track is an abomination due to pitch correction, kind of a slap in the face of Freddie who wouldn't even get his teeth fixed as he felt that could slightly change his delivery). This crap should be stopped in my view.
Yeah, as pointed out by other replies, how does that work? You say what you want, but you don’t explain why. Have you explored why that’s what you want? Like REALLY thought about it? Can you justify (in your own mind) why EQ, reverb, delay, compression (which are all extensively used on vocal recordings) slip under the radar and are natural but tuning isn’t? And that’s before you get into the whole comping 50 takes together into one. That’s no natural. I would offer that your position is the reason artists feel the need to hide the reality of modern recording from you.
@@LeviClay I want to hear the singer actually singing. It isn't that difficult. Surely if most folks are now happy with folks using autotune etc then the artists should be able to say they use it without worrying about losing fans. If an artist is using autotune then I simply would not go and see them. All i am asking is for honesty. Be upfront about it and allow people the freedom to choose whether or not they wish to support that. Both pitch correction and autotune change things and make a singer sound different. I cannot remember who said it but in talking about Steve Marriot and the plans for an AI release "AI has no soul, Steve was soul".
@@madjock-ig5bv do you struggle with reading comprehension? Most folks aren’t happy, but they can’t really articulate why. I promise you. Without a shadow of a doubt. A ton of music you’ve listened to in the last years will have pitch correction on it. Why did you skip the question though? Why does EQ, reverb, delay, and compression get a pass? That’s not the singer actually singing anymore. You’re hearing a dramatically manipulated version of the voice. If a singer singing with a compressor and a de-esser (for the WHOLE song) is you hearing them actually sing, then correcting a SINGLE note by +5 cents (1/20th of a semitone) is you hearing the singer sing.
When I hear "David hates Autotune" what I think is "Ahh, he must be a Melodyne man". The only reason I care if someone uses autotune is that I find the sound really grating, a bit like a less-expressive version of the guitar talk boxes that were popular for a couple of years in the 70s (though less severe). Except it's been going on for decades at this point, in a way that really makes me wish everyone would find a new toy. Someone needs to write a computer virus that forces autotune to follow bebop scales and tempos. That'd be fun.
For me, i have two views on this. Next month i am going to see Samantha Fish at the fantastic Rock City. I don't expect it to be a perfectly perfect performance! I won't be upset if there is a slightly imperfect note because live music is all about the atmosphere and the connection i have with that artist and their music. After all, i will be singing along and i definitely need auto-tune! When i buy or stream music i do expect it to be perfect as it has gone through a production process and can be tweaked to be so. I am not too fussed if it has been 'manipulated'. I hope you don't get too much hate for this as i thought it was a considered and genuine piece from someone who has the knowledge and experience to back it up.
I am not a fan of auto-tune. If people are using it without my knowledge then I am fine. It is when it makes their voice sound different than it really is that it gets to me.
I think, as a non-professional vocalist who dabbles in multiple genres, I might have a answer to your question about why it is acceptable for one genre or singer but not another. It's the sell out mentality, which is sort of a subset of authenticity. Years ago Tool made a song called hooker with a penis (highly recommend if you haven't heard it) in which Maynard explores the nature of being a sell out and the concept of "the man" from the 70s. The reason those in the punk genre could get away with things is because the punk genre was, ostensibly, all about sticking it to the man. Like if you listen to say the vandals anarchy burger, the whole concept of "hold the government" is sticking it to the man. So like the line "if you think you're free, try walking into the deli and urinating on the cheese." There was a mystique in early punk that they were entirely genuine and would never "sell out to the man." There was an expectation for punk musicians to be the uncouth bad boy. The Sex Pistols were loved by so many, regardless of shite vocals, because they were the embodiment of perceived punk authenticity. That's why Metallica lost so many fans after Napster and shit because they became "the man" shitting on the little guy, they lost their authenticity (which it's questionable they ever had, per the Tool explanation) and when they changed their sound, even more so. Which brings us back to Tool and hooker with a penis "I sold out long before you'd ever heard my name. I sold my soul to make a record, dipshit. And then you bought one." So Maynard is basically saying that the pseudo-authenticity the fans apply to these bands is fake before the fans ever become fans, especially back in the day because there wasn't much reach for independent artists. Now any person with a good voice, a guitar and a bit of production software can go viral (look at Ren, he knocked off Rick Astley to claim number one, as an independent.) Which brings us finally to David. There is an expectation for authenticity, especially as he has trained in this, that and the other and he's like trained as a cantor and that puts him a category where he's not allowed to be seen as the least little bit inauthentic or "sell out to the man." Being around as long as Disturbed has, they've already sold out. People say shit like "oh this artist sounds as good live as they do on their studio albums" and they don't seem to realise that what they are subconsciously acknowledging is that the sound guy live has done a fucking amazing job. Which is not to take away from David's exceptional talent. If we take someone like Will Ramos on the other end of metal spectrum, who is an absolute beast at vocals and you listen to the samples where he doesn't have any production on his voice, he sounds amazing but he often doesn't have the vibrancy or the depth in his vocals and there is a "crunchiness" that is almost plosive like because of the way you do gutturals and fry and shit. This is actually a weird trap that amateur or aspiring metal vocalists run into. I did Will's metal vocal course and I thought my vocals sounded like dogshit, until I realised that I don't have the production knowledge that really amplifies vocals. Once I got past that, I started to enjoy the process of the vocals and making weird noises for their own sake. The other problem being an amateur vocalist though is that we spend a lot of time recording our sound on our phone and it's really hard to determine if what we are hearing is "authentic" or sounds the way we hear it to others, especially where the recording program has automatic features. With pop, people already see them as sell outs and whores, so if they do something "sell outish", like use auto tune or pitch correction, there is no backlash because it's almost an industry staple in that genre. There was an old saying about the pop industry "spread your legs, make an album." It wasn't specifically targeted at women but it had those connotations. I think auto tune and pitch correction are a bit of bogeyman, much like AI has become and people don't really understand the mechanics of it. Ultimately, any piece of music, no matter how raw or how live it claims to be, especially if it is an album or something by a band that has been in the business for a while, has some kind of production on it. One of my absolute favourite bands is Cellar Darling, Anna Murphy is a fucking siren. During covid they did live to internet performances and while it is apparent that there is not as much production on her voice, even in that setting there is still production. Hell, a lot of modern mics comes with mechanisms that apply "production" to vocals. And thus endeth my ADHD fueled thesis about why autotune is seen the way it is and why Disturbed fans and metal fans lose their shit when you suggest it. As a metal fan who understands that artists and producers use anything in the toolbox that gives the artists their best sound, which in turn leads to record sales and popularity, I couldn't agree more with you. Again I'd go so far as to say every commercial song we listen to has autotune and pitch correction to one degree or another. The "uncanny valley" is no longer production, it's vocals without the production we subconsciously identify with. I'd say that I've been listening to Disturbed for so long that I know Draiman wasn't the original singer and I'd go so far as to say with everything I know, I don't give a fuck who is or isn't pitch corrected, auto tuned, produced as long as the music they are producing is true to who the band is and it sounds the way the band wants us to hear it then people should unbunch their fuck panties. I don't give a fuck who sold out or didn't because anyone who has produced an album has sold out in one way or another, up until the advent of streaming services. Just one aspiring vocalist's subjective perspective.
David Draiman is a great vocalist, Music is all about connection-not tech, and Cookie Monster could never write "House Where Nobody Lives" :D I enjoy all kinds of music, as long as there's human emotion expressed in it-that's how I'm able to love music in languages I don't speak, or from eras past and cultures not my own. It's all the same magic. If heavy production helps make the music communicate better, great. If it comes through loud and clear (no pun intended) with just a singer/player in a live room, that also is great. The only thing I don't like, and won't accept: people performing without any passion or fun. That stuff is useless.
I saw someone dressed as Rosie on roller skates this morning in a supermarket. I though of you immediately, then proceeded to yell "FUCK YEAH, YOU TELL EM ROSIE!" in honor of you.
I seen him live. He was sick and was upfront about being sick. A few times in the performance he went up to hit the note and his voice did a weird squeak sound. When this happen he would look down and shake his head almost as if he was disappointed in himself. He is an absolute beast the way he toughed it out.
There’s straight up nothing worse as a singer than being sick. It takes all your top end away and really basic shit becomes so difficult. I feel for him on that one. Thanks for watching my dude 😄
Autotune used as an effect a la Cher or T-Pain is a different thing to autotune used to correct pitch. I've never has a problem with it as an effect. I also don't have a problem with autotune used to correct pitch if I can't detect it, even if I know it was used, e.g. the Conan performance. Where I hate it is when it seems to be intended for pitch correction but it's obvious and I can hear it. That happened a lot in pop in the 2000s. I find it distracting and It feels lazy - either the singer or the sound engineer just isn't doing a good enough job. I think some of the concern/disdain from people like Rick Beato and David Draiman is that pitch correction can be used as a crutch to allow a singer to get away with not developing themselves to their full potential. We might all miss out on hearing a remarkable voice because that artist was able to settle for good enough with pitch correction.
Well this is a good point? Like if it’s your selling point that you don’t that’s totally fine but if you do why should it be such a problem. Thanks for watching my dude 💪😄
It reminds me of how so many people carry on about how movies are better when they "don't have any CGI", and they give all these examples of CGI-free movies ... that are actually FILLED with CGI! They just can't identify it. It's gotten so bad that movie studios falsely claim that their movies don't have any CGI when they obviously do, and they just gaslight fans about it. Anyway, this anti auto-tune debate often reminds me of that. We get all of these auto-tune hunters who don't really understand the technology and how it's deployed, and so if they detect anything valid, they detect the lowest hanging fruit possible. And what they miss is everything else. And in the process, they praise musicians who, for all they know, are actually using auto-tune!
Oh man the whole CGI debacle is a complete mess. I just roll my eyes when I see people comment "This is great because no CGI" or "This is crap because it's all CGI".
I've always thought he's a very good, talented vocalist. I dont like how he sounds on Sound of Silence because he sounds pitch corrected, but it doesn't mean that he's not a good vocalist fr. There's definitely an elitist mentality with rock and metal about pitch correction and autotone cause theres this mentality that it means that its correcting poor vocals and therefore not real musicians etc.
Why I don't like autotune: the sound bothers me. It's like combining their voice with TV snow and static. Some people don't like the sound of fingernails on a chalkboard, I feel the same with autotune. Are there bands that use autotune and I don't notice? Probably. At that point, it becomes an "ehhh, whatever" reply.
Pitch correction is another tool in a musician's arsenal and that is absolutely fine. Nobody lost their shit when Tom Morello used a Digitech Whammy pedal all over Rage's first album DESPITE the claim in the sleeve notes that no effects were used on the production of the record. I'd also be willing to bet real money that there's PLENTY of TS fans that would absolutely tear you to pieces for suggesting that she isn't the best singer in the world. Music is so subjective and people are all different (and mostly stupid, mostly) that it really doesn't matter who uses what effects. I've long maintained that there are only two types of music in this world - music you like and music you don't like. "Good" or "Bad" doesn't come into it.
@16:35 Shots fired!! I giggled so bad, ive seen quite a few videos with this .. person, for me he came out of nowhere onto my youtube like some kind of celeb, id never ever seen or heard the name or face before. Then i stopped watching the videos cause i got sick and tired of watching this boomer rant and whine about all sorts of stuff while having a guitar/equipment worth more than i make in 3 years on his lap talking about how music was better before and how the industry screws you around.... no thanx!
It's a shame cause he has a lot of really good videos related to music theory and how certain songs are constructed, and some fantastic interviews. I think his "boomer rants" mostly just come from a place of "the music I love isn't popular anymore" and that's fair, but he just uses it to make lots of "boomer rant" content 🤣
What a great video, Melisa! So well done. Funny at times, insightful, fair. Thank you very much for all the effort you put into it. I agree with you -- whenever you enter the territory of a fan's love for perhaps their favorite artist you're stepping into land riddled with mines. Emotion vs. fact, for starters, as you concisely named it. The image of the artist is crucial here, the qualities generally ascribed to him/her. I liked your conclusion -- that snobbery is the real enemy. It'd be interesting if it became Law that an artist *must* put a sticker or notice of some sort on their albums indicating if pitch correction had been used, and on which songs. And if you lied the fine would be BIG. That at least would solve the authenticity issue from the get-go. Detecting autotune....I feel like I'm pretty good at it, but I don't really know. Producers have probably become really good at subtly using it. Thanks again for this. I prefer my favorites to not use it. And if they do I see it as them admitting "I can no longer hit these notes reliably. I used to be able to but I can't anymore. But I want to present this song in its ideal form, since it's on record here, for posterity. But admittedly I needed a little help to get the pitch right on some notes."
What you're missing is that most people don't go to shows like the Sex Pistols, GWAR, Taylor Swift, etc to hear talented musicians, they go purely for the atmosphere and show. Their fans know they're lousy vocalists and/or musicians and they just want to party and enjoy the show. Bands like Nightwish, Disturbed, Lady Gaga, etc are sold to their fans as being talented musicians/vocalists, so they don't want to hear anything that indicates otherwise once they've become invested in them.
With respect my dude Im pretty sure I discussed at length that people don’t go to Taylor/SP/Britney/cher for chops but for the joy. But I think you’re right. Some artists are sold on and live and die by the fact that they’re very talented, and I don’t think autotune erases that, you know? That being said, music is so personal so who knows what’s the best foot forward on these productions. Thanks for watching 😄💪
I think the fallacy is the idea that using pitch correction/autotone means a vocalist isn't talented or highly skilled. It *can* be in some cases, but in most cases it's not.
I think more people need to understand that
@@SoulSingerDiscovers The thing about autotune is that most outside the industry only hear of it when critics accuse artists of using it to discredit their talent... whether it's fair or not. So, even if you didn't intend your observation in that manner, that's most likely how the people making those comments heard it.
@@sVieira151 I agree and that's what I was trying to get at
@@starchitin yup, not arguing or anything just wanted to add my own thoughts to yours 🙂
Thanks for that one, really appreciated.
I do connect with David. And I don't mind if he is pitch corrected. Same with many singers. I can hear correction sometimes, but I'm sure there are many songs where I can't even guess it's there. What I don't like is that feeling I have with some older songs. I have a personal connection with them, and on some recent releases, I feel there is something changed. It might be just a feeling, it might be true. It might be pitch correction or just the way someone re-processed the track to make it ok for modern media. After all, streaming and vinyl sound different. But there is something I don't like when I feel it's not the same song anymore. I'm losing my connection, and it make me sad.
I really enjoyed this video. Good singers performers artists and writers can and should use whatever they like to make their music sound the way they want. If it hides a weakness then that's alright. If it is the equivalent of plastic surgery for the untalented, that's ok also. I mind this fuss when records released shamed drummers for having a metronome keeping time. Haters gonna hate. You're great, love all you do xx
Interesting take but I don't fully agree. I want to hear the true voice of an artist. Now i have no issue with sometimes using technology on the voice if it is for a particular effect (for instance playing a character within a song) in which case as a listener it is an honest use.
Now if someone says they are snging "live" and they are not then to me they are conning the listener.
If we are going down the route of it being normalised then i want the artist to say they have used it. I can then make a decision whether to buy their way of making music or someone who doesnt use it.
To me there is a dishonesty about using autotune or pitch correction.
At live shows i can handle a singer going out of tune or a singer saying upfront "i am choked up with the cold can you help me out tonight" as this is honest and as a fan or a music lover I can empathise and of course help out by singing loud as fuck in support. Some of my favourite gigs have been like that. Give me that any day over faking shit.
Sorry to disagree with you but that is where I stand. If I went to a gig and found out the singer wasn't singing live I would never go see that artist again. I would also let mates know so they can decide whether to spend money on fakery.
@@madjock-ig5bv I can understand your point of view and I agree with the idea of hearing the true voice of an artist (whether that's a singer, guitarist, or a band as a whole).
Where do you stand on other production techniques used in modern recordings? Things like compression and multitrack recording and layering? It's all used to "enhance" the art, much in the same way pitch correction is. And even demo recordings by modern bands will use some basic production techniques like that.
What I'm saying is: unless you have someone who performs, produces, mixes, and masters the whole thing themselves, in which case the work they've created is their true voice, you won't ever really hear the true voice of an artist unless you see them live.
@@sVieira151 I am aware of lots of things that are done in a studio for a recording. If someone does a vocal and then it is used 2 or 3 times over itself I am still hearing the voice of the singer but just hearing more than 1 of them. It is obvious and still honest as it is indeed obvious.
Even live I have no issue with backing vocals on a track (same with the very famous invisible keyboardist who appears with many rock and metal bands for the odd song), you can see and hear that it is recorded. However when it comes to vocals the singer should be singing live (especially onstage) as well as the musicians who should also be plugged in and playing live.
There are quite a few smaller bands I see regularly who always tell folks "it is all live.... even the bum notes". I would rather that than fakery.
One of the utter crimes going on at the moment is the way older recordings that had nothing wrong with the vocals are now being pitch corrected (the latest Queen track is an abomination due to pitch correction, kind of a slap in the face of Freddie who wouldn't even get his teeth fixed as he felt that could slightly change his delivery). This crap should be stopped in my view.
Yeah, as pointed out by other replies, how does that work? You say what you want, but you don’t explain why. Have you explored why that’s what you want? Like REALLY thought about it?
Can you justify (in your own mind) why EQ, reverb, delay, compression (which are all extensively used on vocal recordings) slip under the radar and are natural but tuning isn’t? And that’s before you get into the whole comping 50 takes together into one. That’s no natural.
I would offer that your position is the reason artists feel the need to hide the reality of modern recording from you.
@@LeviClay I want to hear the singer actually singing. It isn't that difficult. Surely if most folks are now happy with folks using autotune etc then the artists should be able to say they use it without worrying about losing fans.
If an artist is using autotune then I simply would not go and see them.
All i am asking is for honesty. Be upfront about it and allow people the freedom to choose whether or not they wish to support that.
Both pitch correction and autotune change things and make a singer sound different.
I cannot remember who said it but in talking about Steve Marriot and the plans for an AI release "AI has no soul, Steve was soul".
@@madjock-ig5bv do you struggle with reading comprehension? Most folks aren’t happy, but they can’t really articulate why. I promise you. Without a shadow of a doubt. A ton of music you’ve listened to in the last years will have pitch correction on it.
Why did you skip the question though? Why does EQ, reverb, delay, and compression get a pass? That’s not the singer actually singing anymore. You’re hearing a dramatically manipulated version of the voice. If a singer singing with a compressor and a de-esser (for the WHOLE song) is you hearing them actually sing, then correcting a SINGLE note by +5 cents (1/20th of a semitone) is you hearing the singer sing.
When I hear "David hates Autotune" what I think is "Ahh, he must be a Melodyne man".
The only reason I care if someone uses autotune is that I find the sound really grating, a bit like a less-expressive version of the guitar talk boxes that were popular for a couple of years in the 70s (though less severe). Except it's been going on for decades at this point, in a way that really makes me wish everyone would find a new toy.
Someone needs to write a computer virus that forces autotune to follow bebop scales and tempos. That'd be fun.
For me, i have two views on this. Next month i am going to see Samantha Fish at the fantastic Rock City. I don't expect it to be a perfectly perfect performance! I won't be upset if there is a slightly imperfect note because live music is all about the atmosphere and the connection i have with that artist and their music. After all, i will be singing along and i definitely need auto-tune!
When i buy or stream music i do expect it to be perfect as it has gone through a production process and can be tweaked to be so. I am not too fussed if it has been 'manipulated'.
I hope you don't get too much hate for this as i thought it was a considered and genuine piece from someone who has the knowledge and experience to back it up.
I am not a fan of auto-tune. If people are using it without my knowledge then I am fine. It is when it makes their voice sound different than it really is that it gets to me.
If rock bands use autotuned vocals they should just do what WEEN did on their song, 'Spirit Walker' and abuse the fuck out of the autotune.
I think, as a non-professional vocalist who dabbles in multiple genres, I might have a answer to your question about why it is acceptable for one genre or singer but not another. It's the sell out mentality, which is sort of a subset of authenticity. Years ago Tool made a song called hooker with a penis (highly recommend if you haven't heard it) in which Maynard explores the nature of being a sell out and the concept of "the man" from the 70s. The reason those in the punk genre could get away with things is because the punk genre was, ostensibly, all about sticking it to the man. Like if you listen to say the vandals anarchy burger, the whole concept of "hold the government" is sticking it to the man. So like the line "if you think you're free, try walking into the deli and urinating on the cheese." There was a mystique in early punk that they were entirely genuine and would never "sell out to the man." There was an expectation for punk musicians to be the uncouth bad boy. The Sex Pistols were loved by so many, regardless of shite vocals, because they were the embodiment of perceived punk authenticity.
That's why Metallica lost so many fans after Napster and shit because they became "the man" shitting on the little guy, they lost their authenticity (which it's questionable they ever had, per the Tool explanation) and when they changed their sound, even more so. Which brings us back to Tool and hooker with a penis "I sold out long before you'd ever heard my name. I sold my soul to make a record, dipshit. And then you bought one." So Maynard is basically saying that the pseudo-authenticity the fans apply to these bands is fake before the fans ever become fans, especially back in the day because there wasn't much reach for independent artists. Now any person with a good voice, a guitar and a bit of production software can go viral (look at Ren, he knocked off Rick Astley to claim number one, as an independent.)
Which brings us finally to David. There is an expectation for authenticity, especially as he has trained in this, that and the other and he's like trained as a cantor and that puts him a category where he's not allowed to be seen as the least little bit inauthentic or "sell out to the man." Being around as long as Disturbed has, they've already sold out. People say shit like "oh this artist sounds as good live as they do on their studio albums" and they don't seem to realise that what they are subconsciously acknowledging is that the sound guy live has done a fucking amazing job. Which is not to take away from David's exceptional talent. If we take someone like Will Ramos on the other end of metal spectrum, who is an absolute beast at vocals and you listen to the samples where he doesn't have any production on his voice, he sounds amazing but he often doesn't have the vibrancy or the depth in his vocals and there is a "crunchiness" that is almost plosive like because of the way you do gutturals and fry and shit. This is actually a weird trap that amateur or aspiring metal vocalists run into. I did Will's metal vocal course and I thought my vocals sounded like dogshit, until I realised that I don't have the production knowledge that really amplifies vocals. Once I got past that, I started to enjoy the process of the vocals and making weird noises for their own sake. The other problem being an amateur vocalist though is that we spend a lot of time recording our sound on our phone and it's really hard to determine if what we are hearing is "authentic" or sounds the way we hear it to others, especially where the recording program has automatic features.
With pop, people already see them as sell outs and whores, so if they do something "sell outish", like use auto tune or pitch correction, there is no backlash because it's almost an industry staple in that genre. There was an old saying about the pop industry "spread your legs, make an album." It wasn't specifically targeted at women but it had those connotations. I think auto tune and pitch correction are a bit of bogeyman, much like AI has become and people don't really understand the mechanics of it.
Ultimately, any piece of music, no matter how raw or how live it claims to be, especially if it is an album or something by a band that has been in the business for a while, has some kind of production on it. One of my absolute favourite bands is Cellar Darling, Anna Murphy is a fucking siren. During covid they did live to internet performances and while it is apparent that there is not as much production on her voice, even in that setting there is still production. Hell, a lot of modern mics comes with mechanisms that apply "production" to vocals.
And thus endeth my ADHD fueled thesis about why autotune is seen the way it is and why Disturbed fans and metal fans lose their shit when you suggest it. As a metal fan who understands that artists and producers use anything in the toolbox that gives the artists their best sound, which in turn leads to record sales and popularity, I couldn't agree more with you. Again I'd go so far as to say every commercial song we listen to has autotune and pitch correction to one degree or another. The "uncanny valley" is no longer production, it's vocals without the production we subconsciously identify with. I'd say that I've been listening to Disturbed for so long that I know Draiman wasn't the original singer and I'd go so far as to say with everything I know, I don't give a fuck who is or isn't pitch corrected, auto tuned, produced as long as the music they are producing is true to who the band is and it sounds the way the band wants us to hear it then people should unbunch their fuck panties. I don't give a fuck who sold out or didn't because anyone who has produced an album has sold out in one way or another, up until the advent of streaming services.
Just one aspiring vocalist's subjective perspective.
great points, funny material, awesome accent
Thank you kindly my dude 😊💪
David Draiman is a great vocalist, Music is all about connection-not tech, and Cookie Monster could never write "House Where Nobody Lives" :D I enjoy all kinds of music, as long as there's human emotion expressed in it-that's how I'm able to love music in languages I don't speak, or from eras past and cultures not my own. It's all the same magic. If heavy production helps make the music communicate better, great. If it comes through loud and clear (no pun intended) with just a singer/player in a live room, that also is great. The only thing I don't like, and won't accept: people performing without any passion or fun. That stuff is useless.
I think Disturbed fan were pissed that you basically called David a "Cheater"
Great points. I am very chill today. Keep up the great work My Fine Scottish Lady! ❤❤❤
I saw someone dressed as Rosie on roller skates this morning in a supermarket. I though of you immediately, then proceeded to yell "FUCK YEAH, YOU TELL EM ROSIE!" in honor of you.
😂😂😂 my the dog bless and keep you my dude! That made me cackle ❤️
the best part. The shoppers were MORTIFIED!!
I seen him live. He was sick and was upfront about being sick. A few times in the performance he went up to hit the note and his voice did a weird squeak sound. When this happen he would look down and shake his head almost as if he was disappointed in himself. He is an absolute beast the way he toughed it out.
There’s straight up nothing worse as a singer than being sick. It takes all your top end away and really basic shit becomes so difficult. I feel for him on that one. Thanks for watching my dude 😄
Autotune used as an effect a la Cher or T-Pain is a different thing to autotune used to correct pitch. I've never has a problem with it as an effect. I also don't have a problem with autotune used to correct pitch if I can't detect it, even if I know it was used, e.g. the Conan performance. Where I hate it is when it seems to be intended for pitch correction but it's obvious and I can hear it. That happened a lot in pop in the 2000s. I find it distracting and It feels lazy - either the singer or the sound engineer just isn't doing a good enough job.
I think some of the concern/disdain from people like Rick Beato and David Draiman is that pitch correction can be used as a crutch to allow a singer to get away with not developing themselves to their full potential. We might all miss out on hearing a remarkable voice because that artist was able to settle for good enough with pitch correction.
Being serious. It’s really a superb video dudette. People are people and they will always hate all and nothing.
Every other instrument gets processed, so why not vocals too?
Well this is a good point? Like if it’s your selling point that you don’t that’s totally fine but if you do why should it be such a problem. Thanks for watching my dude 💪😄
Autotune is a way of cheating. I'd be disappointed. If you want to fake your performance, go full Milli Vanilli.
Music isn’t a competition, so it’s impossible to cheat at it.
It reminds me of how so many people carry on about how movies are better when they "don't have any CGI", and they give all these examples of CGI-free movies ... that are actually FILLED with CGI! They just can't identify it. It's gotten so bad that movie studios falsely claim that their movies don't have any CGI when they obviously do, and they just gaslight fans about it. Anyway, this anti auto-tune debate often reminds me of that. We get all of these auto-tune hunters who don't really understand the technology and how it's deployed, and so if they detect anything valid, they detect the lowest hanging fruit possible. And what they miss is everything else. And in the process, they praise musicians who, for all they know, are actually using auto-tune!
Oh man the whole CGI debacle is a complete mess. I just roll my eyes when I see people comment "This is great because no CGI" or "This is crap because it's all CGI".
I've always thought he's a very good, talented vocalist.
I dont like how he sounds on Sound of Silence because he sounds pitch corrected, but it doesn't mean that he's not a good vocalist fr.
There's definitely an elitist mentality with rock and metal about pitch correction and autotone cause theres this mentality that it means that its correcting poor vocals and therefore not real musicians etc.
Why I don't like autotune: the sound bothers me. It's like combining their voice with TV snow and static. Some people don't like the sound of fingernails on a chalkboard, I feel the same with autotune. Are there bands that use autotune and I don't notice? Probably. At that point, it becomes an "ehhh, whatever" reply.
ping
Where did you ping me!? 😄
@@SoulSingerDiscovers Couldn't care less about Disturbed but still wanted to please the algorithm gods.... sooo ping ;-)
@@SubwaySweden you’re a beautiful bastard Subway! For a minute there I thought you had messaged me and I missed it 😄
@@SoulSingerDiscovers ps. benefits of autotune explained in 30 seconds.
ua-cam.com/video/7cOJgsVWsik/v-deo.html
Pitch correction is another tool in a musician's arsenal and that is absolutely fine. Nobody lost their shit when Tom Morello used a Digitech Whammy pedal all over Rage's first album DESPITE the claim in the sleeve notes that no effects were used on the production of the record. I'd also be willing to bet real money that there's PLENTY of TS fans that would absolutely tear you to pieces for suggesting that she isn't the best singer in the world. Music is so subjective and people are all different (and mostly stupid, mostly) that it really doesn't matter who uses what effects. I've long maintained that there are only two types of music in this world - music you like and music you don't like. "Good" or "Bad" doesn't come into it.
@16:35 Shots fired!! I giggled so bad, ive seen quite a few videos with this .. person, for me he came out of nowhere onto my youtube like some kind of celeb, id never ever seen or heard the name or face before. Then i stopped watching the videos cause i got sick and tired of watching this boomer rant and whine about all sorts of stuff while having a guitar/equipment worth more than i make in 3 years on his lap talking about how music was better before and how the industry screws you around.... no thanx!
It's a shame cause he has a lot of really good videos related to music theory and how certain songs are constructed, and some fantastic interviews. I think his "boomer rants" mostly just come from a place of "the music I love isn't popular anymore" and that's fair, but he just uses it to make lots of "boomer rant" content 🤣