I'm indifferent to autotune. Most "bad" songs with autotune would be garbage without it as well so does it really matter? It's just a vocal effect and a way of manipulating sound. That's what music is, the manipulation of sound for the purpose of expression.
Autotune - Should it be considered an art? - Page 6
Forum Index > General Forum |
DoctorHelvetica
United States15034 Posts
I'm indifferent to autotune. Most "bad" songs with autotune would be garbage without it as well so does it really matter? It's just a vocal effect and a way of manipulating sound. That's what music is, the manipulation of sound for the purpose of expression. | ||
zingmars
Latvia189 Posts
| ||
SwiftSpear
Canada355 Posts
On April 10 2011 15:30 CursedRich wrote: There is not one song that will be listened to in 10 years time that is auto-tuned and will be considered classic, its a tool for bad pop music Vocoders are much cooler for using the voice as a synthesized sound, think Daft Punk and you should understand the difference Vocoder and autotune is the same thing, more or less. | ||
SwiftSpear
Canada355 Posts
On April 10 2011 15:30 Parsistamon wrote: It depends on the manner in which it's done--I think Kanye's autotune is pretty good, but others like Tpain are pretty bad. I think it's as legitimate as any vocoder or synth though. Again: it depends on the performer. Tpain is famous for the talkbox style. He has some good stuff and some bad stuff. He's not too bad as a mixer in general. | ||
Swede
New Zealand853 Posts
On April 10 2011 15:32 DoctorHelvetica wrote: It's just another element of sound. Whether or not you like it has nothing to do with it is an "art" or not. This idea that the validity of music is somehow directly proportional to the skill it took to produce is pretty absurd. I'm indifferent to autotune. Most "bad" songs with autotune would be garbage without it as well so does it really matter? It's just a vocal effect and a way of manipulating sound. That's what music is, the manipulation of sound for the purpose of expression. Totally agree with this. Very well put. | ||
Moonwrath
United States9568 Posts
| ||
WyghtWolf
Israel145 Posts
and violates the ear drums in ways I'm scared to describe... | ||
NiTenIchiRyu
United Kingdom273 Posts
Autotune pretty much killed modern pop music, but hey at least it is still better than K-pop. | ||
XsebT
Denmark2980 Posts
It's MUSIC. And yes, autotuning is music. It's totally subjective whether you like it or not. Personally, I don't like autotune - I just think it sounds horrible. If it's only to fix vocals then obviously that person shouldn't sing in the first place. | ||
vek
Australia936 Posts
On April 10 2011 15:32 DoctorHelvetica wrote: It's just another element of sound. Whether or not you like it has nothing to do with it is an "art" or not. This idea that the validity of music is somehow directly proportional to the skill it took to produce is pretty absurd. I'm indifferent to autotune. Most "bad" songs with autotune would be garbage without it as well so does it really matter? It's just a vocal effect and a way of manipulating sound. That's what music is, the manipulation of sound for the purpose of expression. Sums up how I feel perfectly. People had the same complaints about synthesisers and "electronic instruments" in the 70s and 80s. Both are pretty widely accepted these days. Autotune is just another new tool for artists to make use of. I don't care if its autotune, vocaloid or some guy tapping his fingers on a desk. If it sounds good I'll enjoy it. | ||
Ceril
Sweden1343 Posts
You look like something a donkey rode in on, have tremendous talen but the makeup budget to get you out there would be enough to feed an african nation: Go the old long road to fame where you'll never earn a tenth of what the mixandthrowaway artists of today make, bonus; Some will remember your name 10 and 20 years from now. I do not think autotune as a tool for artists to draw on is bad. But making an artist based entirely on autotune and sex appeal? Cultural worth of a dead rat. Nice $$$, which is all that matters short term. That said theres some great originality in electric music, but todays mainstream is a shamefull reflection of our society and what it values. | ||
Navane
Netherlands2698 Posts
On April 10 2011 18:17 vek wrote: Sums up how I feel perfectly. People had the same complaints about synthesisers and "electronic instruments" in the 70s and 80s. Both are pretty widely accepted these days. Autotune is just another new tool for artists to make use of. I don't care if its autotune, vocaloid or some guy tapping his fingers on a desk. If it sounds good I'll enjoy it. And what if I take a record of an obscure 80's band and I release it as if it's my own music. Is that an art? It still sounds good and that's all what counts, right? | ||
3clipse
Canada2555 Posts
| ||
vek
Australia936 Posts
On April 10 2011 18:38 Navane wrote: And what if I take a record of an obscure 80's band and I release it as if it's my own music. Is that an art? It still sounds good and that's all what counts, right? I don't really understand what your argument is, sorry. I'm pretty sure what you are talking about is just plagiarism. Autotune is just another tool artists have access to that they can create new/different sounds with. | ||
SwiftSpear
Canada355 Posts
On April 10 2011 18:15 XsebT wrote: I hate the word "art". It's MUSIC. And yes, autotuning is music. It's totally subjective whether you like it or not. Personally, I don't like autotune - I just think it sounds horrible. If it's only to fix vocals then obviously that person shouldn't sing in the first place. It fits with some stuff. The way it's used in most pop I'm not very fond of. | ||
Stroggoz
New Zealand79 Posts
it is art without question. | ||
JoFritzMD
Australia163 Posts
| ||
Rotcod
United Kingdom138 Posts
| ||
Yergidy
United States2107 Posts
On April 10 2011 18:29 Ceril wrote: You look good, cant actually sing or have any real talent, but with $$$ we'll make you into a star. You look like something a donkey rode in on, have tremendous talen but the makeup budget to get you out there would be enough to feed an african nation: Go the old long road to fame where you'll never earn a tenth of what the mixandthrowaway artists of today make, bonus; Some will remember your name 10 and 20 years from now. I do not think autotune as a tool for artists to draw on is bad. But making an artist based entirely on autotune and sex appeal? Cultural worth of a dead rat. Nice $$$, which is all that matters short term. That said theres some great originality in electric music, but todays mainstream is a shamefull reflection of our society and what it values. Well said. I completely agree. | ||
Aelfric
Turkey1496 Posts
On April 10 2011 10:52 Jombozeus wrote: Some rappers just cant sing, and they need to autotune their voice to sound remotely listenable. Plus, it sounds good, so why not. It can be just as good as a normal song or just as bad as a normal song. Why do people who can't sing should do rap ? Is it only because music industry can't find young talents fast enough to satisfy the demand? So the autotune will be the quickest way arround? Dunno, it feels wrong to me, i couldn't like autotune songs no matter how much i tried. It's so robotic and out of soul. | ||
| ||