Autotune is pretty misunderstood, imo. You have to be a really good singer already to sound natural using it, and I can't see how it would inspire laziness in artists? It doesn't make your voice sound any "better" than it is, just more in tune: the better *you* sound, the better autotune sounds. And I dunno - why is it a problem that people who aren't necessarily the greatest singers can use it to produce something that makes them happy? It still takes a lot of work to get it to sound decent, regardless. Personally, I am all for any technology that enables anyone to have a go, and feel good while doing it - and that is something autotune offers the non-singer. :-)
Well okay but like: do you really believe that a pop star who can’t sing is using autotune to just make themselves happy? Really? Nah.
And how does cheating make better art? They’re doing this to make money off a thing they don’t have. It’s like fraud. Sort of.
Sure, use it for your own pleasure, I have zero beef with that. But don’t make me listen to it. And, no: the originating voice does not make for better fake voice, that’s not how that normally works.
Haha - ok. :) We'll just have to agree to disagree. Having used autotune a lot in music production both for the robotic "effect" and as a subtle enhancement on near-perfect performances, I can safely say that it isn't a "fake" voice, it simply tunes the voice which is already there - the final result will still sound like you. If the original voice sounds "bad", then your auto-tuned voice will still sound "bad", just in-tune. That's how it works. It can't make you into a good singer - "good" singing is a lot more than basic tuning. And the more out of tune you are the more crappy autotune sounds - it's not magic, it can only do so much. And hey, at the end of the day no-one's *making* you listen to anything right? Like, I get being angry at corporate manipulations of popular forms of art, and their control of the public sphere, for sure, but that's been going on for a long time, and autotune really doesn't have a lot to do with it, imo.
Ahhh good. Yes indeed let’s do and I have utmost respect for your particular use of it. I actually think we agree more than might be obvious but yeah no totes cool. Thank you so much for the discussion!
Definitely not an expert haha - but yeah have some experience with it. It sure is fun to muck around on! I think you're right, probably more agreement than disagreement deep down :-) Thanks to you as well. (p.s. checked out your month of poetry writing, and really enjoyed it - nice work)
I never heard of auto tune before this; by the end I got the jist of what it is. I think this is one of the disturbing things about technology; by making things easier it takes away the need to develop deep knowledge about a field or craft or art. Not to toot my own horn but I wrote about this in my essay "Under the Hood."
So interesting. I am working on an essay about technology (actually about clothes washers... EXCITING!) and how we use it in our lives. I think one of the key issues is intentionality. Is technology being used instead of skill building or crafting OR is it allowing one to create something wholly different--attaining something that would otherwise be not possible but still incredibly difficult and novel?
Intentionality is key I think, yep. Like: is it used to correct a bad 'product' or is it a tool in an artist's toolbox; just another paintbrush that can give a different effect than the others?
Autotune is pretty misunderstood, imo. You have to be a really good singer already to sound natural using it, and I can't see how it would inspire laziness in artists? It doesn't make your voice sound any "better" than it is, just more in tune: the better *you* sound, the better autotune sounds. And I dunno - why is it a problem that people who aren't necessarily the greatest singers can use it to produce something that makes them happy? It still takes a lot of work to get it to sound decent, regardless. Personally, I am all for any technology that enables anyone to have a go, and feel good while doing it - and that is something autotune offers the non-singer. :-)
Well okay but like: do you really believe that a pop star who can’t sing is using autotune to just make themselves happy? Really? Nah.
And how does cheating make better art? They’re doing this to make money off a thing they don’t have. It’s like fraud. Sort of.
Sure, use it for your own pleasure, I have zero beef with that. But don’t make me listen to it. And, no: the originating voice does not make for better fake voice, that’s not how that normally works.
Haha - ok. :) We'll just have to agree to disagree. Having used autotune a lot in music production both for the robotic "effect" and as a subtle enhancement on near-perfect performances, I can safely say that it isn't a "fake" voice, it simply tunes the voice which is already there - the final result will still sound like you. If the original voice sounds "bad", then your auto-tuned voice will still sound "bad", just in-tune. That's how it works. It can't make you into a good singer - "good" singing is a lot more than basic tuning. And the more out of tune you are the more crappy autotune sounds - it's not magic, it can only do so much. And hey, at the end of the day no-one's *making* you listen to anything right? Like, I get being angry at corporate manipulations of popular forms of art, and their control of the public sphere, for sure, but that's been going on for a long time, and autotune really doesn't have a lot to do with it, imo.
Thank you, also, for the insider’s insight into how it works! Love to have someone who’s an actual expert in this weighing in.
Ahhh good. Yes indeed let’s do and I have utmost respect for your particular use of it. I actually think we agree more than might be obvious but yeah no totes cool. Thank you so much for the discussion!
Definitely not an expert haha - but yeah have some experience with it. It sure is fun to muck around on! I think you're right, probably more agreement than disagreement deep down :-) Thanks to you as well. (p.s. checked out your month of poetry writing, and really enjoyed it - nice work)
I never heard of auto tune before this; by the end I got the jist of what it is. I think this is one of the disturbing things about technology; by making things easier it takes away the need to develop deep knowledge about a field or craft or art. Not to toot my own horn but I wrote about this in my essay "Under the Hood."
So interesting. I am working on an essay about technology (actually about clothes washers... EXCITING!) and how we use it in our lives. I think one of the key issues is intentionality. Is technology being used instead of skill building or crafting OR is it allowing one to create something wholly different--attaining something that would otherwise be not possible but still incredibly difficult and novel?
Intentionality is key I think, yep. Like: is it used to correct a bad 'product' or is it a tool in an artist's toolbox; just another paintbrush that can give a different effect than the others?