General Music Chat

I was referring to mistakes such as on one track where ringo comes in late because he was blowing his nose, but hey.

My comment on this as a singer is purely selfish.
I feel that this kind of software diminishes whatever
talent I may have as a singer. Now anyone can do it.
Maybe the way some feel about Guitar Hero. I guess
it only helps in the studio and any impromptu
Live performance would separate the men from the boys.
I think that is where technology will always be one
step behind. If I sing a Love song with eye contact.
There is no machine to replace that.

I agree with you, Klugmo. However, I'm gonna use the hell out of this 30-day trial and try to get something worth listening to up on my profile... I can't find a singer and I'm terrible.

I've had some experience with Pitch correction. When I was younger I fell off of a boys ten speed. Figure it out...

Technically using a microphone, amplifier and effects is "cheating" when it comes to singing but we've all come to accept those technologies. So it is with any new gizmo; the young adopt it quicker than the old. It's just another tool to be used as the artist sees fit. The end product is what counts. Also, recording in a studio does not necessarily have to reflect what the artist does live. It's the same as a painter who works two years on an oil painting versus a sketch artist who produces a drawing before your eyes. Both are valid expressions of the artist and neither is more valid than the other.

Mike I’m usually really lenient on the music I like personally. If someone hits a wrong note, I’m not the type to say well that guy just sucks because he can’t play flawlessly for four minutes. But if you decide to deviate entirely from conformity, it had better be done with conviction. That’s what I mean. All art is based on perception. An A minor could sound like crap, if you’re playing an A sus4 instead for no particular reason other than a missed chord. Now do it four times in that same song and people get the gist the first time wasn’t a fluke. It may sound off, but then there is a strong suspicion it’s supposed too.

In live music if you’re doing a headstand at the same time, chances are it’ll go over well. On a blind download over the internet, the perception and purpose is massively different. There are lots of other perfectly orderly quantized and beautifully compressed options available. Imperfection is just not a strong selling angle, I’m not talking about money, but acceptance. The story or concept would have to be really huge, to offset intentional ineptness. Sid Vicious for example. And yeah Mike there are no limitations in the other direction, towards the pursuit of legitimacy. Somewhere out there, is a drummer complaining about the innovation of plucked strings.

Dizzizz:
I agree there is no such thing as a perfect musician or performance, but by perfect music I’m referring to computer generated composition. Sure technically not absolutely perfect, nothing can be, but when you can edit and create within a millisecond, it’s closer than the real thing could ever accomplish. The Beatles were also huge studio innovators, much of what they did for effects in the studio had never been done before. Does that make them any less talented? Not too long ago someone had posted Paul’s solo vocal track and wow, yeah the guy could sing. But let’s remove punch in recording, reverb and any other tool that enhances his ability and then compare it to a good modern vocalist with all the bells and whistles applied. Is it a fair match?

I’m just saying they may not have been perfect, but if there were a way that they could have sounded better, they would and did use it. Now given that I don’t know any Paul McCartney’s offhand, should I limit the abilities to enhance what I have for the sake of sincerity, or do whatever possible to make the best of what I have available? Anyone who has been to a professional studio has had access to the same tools, or even better, especially with the assistance of a professional. What I’m doing is in my own hands, if there is a way to improve it, I’m going to try.

There's also music which is played perfectly, flawlessly, and still sucks ass. There are LOTS of skilled technicians with no soul AT ALL. But, that is just going from one extreme to another, I suppose.

The funny thing about Sid Vicious is he was was hardly ever heard in the Sex Pistols. That's Steve Jones doubling on bass (or Glen Matlock in other recordings). The band would turn his amp WAY down live, rendering him inaudible most of the time. "Just bounce around and sneer, Sid. Good!"

Another funny thing, about Paul McCartney, is that the bridge was installed incorrectly on his Hofner, rendering it impossible to tune. He apparently never noticed, because he didn't have it corrected until the 1990's.

Would you feel the same way if some hack that only played air guitar had a guitar that automatically followed the music and had automatic note correction and riff insertion. Something that could make someone who couldn't play a note a star? And the only thing that really made his a guitar hero was the big money behind him?

Then some air guitar hacks with better moves could take all the jobs that musicians who have honed their craft over the years now have. Eventually it will all be moot anyway. Then there will be no need for musicians who hone their craft. No need for practice to obtain perfection. Just hit the button. And when they hear you play they'll compare your skills to someone using "studio Magic". It is going that direction. Mime guitar players. Cool idea, huh? Not a level playing field at all.

Obviously I don't mind a few screw ups because I leave all the bad notes in my recordings. You can hear every one of them loud and clear. I don't mind doing a song right until I get it as close as I can to what I want to do. I'm not a perfect guitar player so I won't pretend to be one.

How about just getting rid of the all skill elements involved in making music and go directly to "thinking the notes". Of course there will have to be some device invented for think correction. Someone will always looking for the lazy way out. If you can't do it live, then do something that you can do live. There's something to be said for choosing material that you can do well as opposed to material you want to do but can't. I hear "professional" singers and musicians at the top of the food chain that sound like crap live, while musicians who have worked hard go nowhere.

I have heard musicians that perform better or just as well live. They paid their dues. Maybe we can just take a pill some day and be virtuosos. Go figure...

Should we not use the tools that are available to us? Alice in Chains and Avenged Sevenfold both use harmonizers frequently; it helps give them their particular sound. Is that cheating? Synthesizers can emulate the sound of a string section; should we not use them? Purists are the first to become extinct.

I disagree with Jimmy. The end result is not what counts.
If I go to a concert and the performer sounds nothing like
the recording (off key, whatever) I know he doesn't have the skills I thought he did. The engineer should be up there, not him. If he sucks
Live then he is fraudulent, not valid. Value needs to be given to
real talent.

Would you feel the same way if some hack that only played air guitar had a guitar that automatically followed the music and had automatic note correction and riff insertion. Something that could make someone who couldn't play a note a star? And the only thing that really made his a guitar hero was the big money behind him?

Then some air guitar hacks with better moves could take all the jobs that musicians who have honed their craft over the years now have. Eventually it will all be moot anyway. Then there will be no need for musicians who hone their craft. No need for practice to obtain perfection. Just hit the button. And when they hear you play they'll compare your skills to someone using "studio Magic". It is going that direction. Mime guitar players. Cool idea, huh? Not a level playing field at all.

Obviously I don't mind a few screw ups because I leave all the bad notes in my recordings. You can hear every one of them loud and clear. I don't mind doing a song right until I get it as close as I can to what I want to do. I'm not a perfect guitar player so I won't pretend to be one.

How about just getting rid of the all skill elements involved in making music and go directly to "thinking the notes". Of course there will have to be some device invented for think correction. Someone will always looking for the lazy way out. If you can't do it live, then do something that you can do live. There's something to be said for choosing material that you can do well as opposed to material you want to do but can't. I hear "professional" singers and musicians at the top of the food chain that sound like crap live, while musicians who have worked hard go nowhere.

I have heard musicians that perform better or just as well live. They paid their dues. Maybe we can just take a pill some day and be virtuosos. Go figure...

CDD45045-7713-4A58-847D-6337C6497C53 by Prince Malagant, on Flickr

Bobs post of Roy Buchanan is a Live performance. His guitar is
being assisted by effects not replaced. It is a coordination of
effects. I believe that vocals are a different animal all together.
We all have a voice yet not all can sing. When the instrument is
biological I think it takes on a different value to most listeners.
Barbara Striesand, Johnny Mathis, Alison Krauss. These vocalists are
1 in Ten Million or more. To create those vocals electronicly is
probably possible but not respectable in any way.
I know I am bias.

"His guitar is being assisted by effects not replaced."

Pitch correction does not replace vocals, it assists them. Overuse is detectable and there is some art involved in using it tastefully and only where needed. You would be surprised to learn how many artists and maybe even some of your heroes use it.

I still maintain that the end result is what matters. If a technology can help me the artist achieve what I hear in my mind then I will use it.

In that world the software becomes the artist.

As long as there are brainless buts bouncing around on a dance floor that neither understand or even consider art, there will be record execs capitalizing on it. The difference in those that use automated voicing and Vanilla Ice or soulless modern country?
uh, none!

I'd rather hear someone with a semi crappy voice sing a real heartfelt song, than one o these droids babbling gobbely goop through a machine... but then I'm not interested in bouncing my tits around!

I would have appreciated this tool in the studio with Bob Dylan... I mean since I had to hear it, in key would have been an improvement.

I'm sure everyone in the symphony disdained Guitars when they came out, and having heard what a few folks have done with it, I could almost agree.

But we shouldn't blame guns for gunshot wounds, and we shouldn't blame tech and effects for the tasteless way they get used by some folks.