Autotune is a stylistic choice, like painting with a thin brush or a thick brush, naturalism v. expressionism, black & white film v color/different saturations & shot compositions, like choosing to use an electric guitar or an acoustic guitar, or to synthesize electric drums vs. using natural drums and putting effects on them or running them clean. There are a million more examples these are just a few.

Autotune can be used badly or used incredibly well, like any other instrument.

To back my statement, here is an example of what I personally consider to be an excellent example of using autotune as a stylistic choice to (arguably) great effect. This piece of music is, in my mind, indubitably art, whether you personally enjoy it or not doesn't include or preclude it from being art.

Bon Iver - Woods
Linky Link

Bon Iver doesn't use autotune in many songs, but when it is used it's not to cover weaknesses, check out the album For Emma, Forever Ago if you'd like some validation of Bon Iver as a bona fide musician.

SwiftSpear

Canada355 Posts

April 10 2011 05:43 GMT

#85

Autotune doesn't show skill of the singer, but it shows skill in a musical ear and technical ability by the mixer. There is both good mixing and bad mixing when it comes to autotune as well. I think there's place for both in music. Autotune is an especially powerful tool for up and coming mixers who don't have the resources to hire an elite vocalist, they can get a good sound out of a moderate singer if they have some skill with the digital manipulation.

I think part of the problem is we still have a music industry who worships singers and musicians, when so much of the real brilliance is the work of the guys behind mixing boards and computer screens these days, and those guys are making some ground shaking music.

WniO

United States2706 Posts

April 10 2011 05:49 GMT

#86

if duchamps "fountain" (which he literally just took from a store and wrote his name on,) [image loading]

is considered the single most influential piece of art, then im sure auto-tune can fit right into the great world of art.

mprs

Canada2933 Posts

April 10 2011 05:52 GMT

#87

I think if your vision for music requires a robotty sound that is auto-tuned, then do what you please. However, I doubt most people when they sing their songs think "Well, what would be really awesome in my masterpiece, is some auto-tune to ruin my voice".

As a tool, by all means use it. A group like Daft Punk uses it and it goes well with their music. *Gulp* Even heartbreaks and 808s was done with autotune as the wanted product (or so the artist says... regardless, you can't deny that it did fit together nicely).

But in Pop music, I have never said "well this artist was going for a shitty robot voice".

Weather you differentiate between the two cases, it does not matter. My ears are used to hearing live voices with changes in pitch, tone, etc. When I hear auto-tuned stuff like Kesha, I don't see any artistry behind her singing or the way she communicates her music. The only thing you may call art is her lyrics which she probably doesn't write, and even if she did, it isn't stimulating in any way shape or form.

moltenlead

Canada866 Posts

April 10 2011 05:54 GMT

#88

I think that autotuning could be an interesting dabble by an already established or capable artist to try out a new genre, but having artists autotune every single one of their songs........ well then they aren't or shouldn't be called artists.

DystopiaX

United States16236 Posts

April 10 2011 05:55 GMT

#89

Ehhh...depends how it's used. There are times when it's used well, and I think that the composer/producer has artistic creativity. However, if the person using autotune has not proved that they can actually sing, or it's clear that they have no actual talent, then that's a case where autotune is misused.

As for whether or not it's dead, I think the type of autotune where that's all that's going on is dead, but I think it'll always linger on occasionally for certain runs or whatnot. It's not going to be completely dead because it's a quick and easy way to make something sound different, but I think most people are past the point now where they're ok if autotune is the only standout feature in a song.

billy5000

United States865 Posts

April 10 2011 06:10 GMT

#90

umm..people need to visit a recording session in an actual studio and compare the song before and after some tweaks have been made. believe it or not, most artists/bands use auto tune (OMG, right?). it may not sound the same on the surface, but it is auto tune to a lesser degree nevertheless.

personally, i dislike the sounds made by pure auto tune (t pain, kesha, etc). but i think people in this thread need to realize they're bashing their own favorite artists/bands when they give autotune a bad name.

ignorance is bliss..huehuehue!

meegrean

Thailand7699 Posts

April 10 2011 06:12 GMT

#91

Autotune has reached the point where it just fucking annoys me every time I hear it.

semantics

10040 Posts

April 10 2011 06:13 GMT

#92

autotune like lo-fi music is a style choice it's popular now thus it's also popular to hate on it. but shit will stick around in one form or another, in the end if the music sounds good people will listen.

Enki

United States2548 Posts

April 10 2011 06:13 GMT

#93

It's because of autotune that we see so much mass produced shit nowadays. It's one of the worst things to happen in music imo.

SwiftSpear

Canada355 Posts

April 10 2011 06:15 GMT

#94

On April 10 2011 14:54 moltenlead wrote:
I think that autotuning could be an interesting dabble by an already established or capable artist to try out a new genre, but having artists autotune every single one of their songs........ well then they aren't or shouldn't be called artists.

I'd disagree with this... but then, you have some distinctions to make. Is the "artist's" greatest selling point their vocals? Are they a singer, or a song writer, or a musician, or a mixer? I'd forgive Moby 100% of the time for using autotune should he so choose to, because what's good about his music was never his vocals, it was his sound, the bigger picture. Singing quality isn't what sells his songs, and never has been. The great vocals in his music, if there are any, aren't his anyways.

If we're talking about generic Idol #4593, who has some douche bag pay writers 2 cents a word for song lyrics and tosses tracks through the mixing machine where some devry art institute music grad "masters" the track for 30 dollars an hour and a microprint credit on the back of the CD cover, then ya, I don't think what's going on there should be called art. It's pretty much McMusic.

Not every artist who uses auto-tune fits into that category though, not even remotely.

billy5000

United States865 Posts

April 10 2011 06:18 GMT

#95

is it me or do i sense that people are being "forced" to listen to the radio nowadays? hell, i feel like i'm living in a free world right now.

Wonderballs

Canada253 Posts

April 10 2011 06:20 GMT

#96

There a time and place for everything, and its called: college.

bjornkavist

Canada1235 Posts

April 10 2011 06:30 GMT

#97

Auto tune is a tool that can greatly enhance the feel of a song unfortunately it's been over used and shed in the wrong light now that there is a taboo in trying to use it to some form of actual artistic success. Listen to "Hotel Arizona" By "Wilco" where they use a small bit of autotune to meld the Lead singer, Jeff Tweedy's voice into the sound of the distortion guitar. It's a really cool trick that really adds a cool weird vibe to the song

CursedRich

United Kingdom737 Posts

April 10 2011 06:30 GMT

#98

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

Parsistamon

United States390 Posts

April 10 2011 06:30 GMT

#99

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.

NMC

Canada28 Posts

April 10 2011 06:32 GMT

#100

The Vocoder is the real answer here. Cynic is a good example of a great band that uses vocoder to complement the sound without diminishing the artistic value. Would that same drum solo be so impressive if it was a drum machine? Kinda ruins it for me, I have no interest in autotuned music.