It's worse than you think. Justin Bonitz of Tallah (featuring Mike Portnoy's son on drums) did a huge rant about this. About how bands he's seen are just piping in the entire performance through the speakers. Not even just vocals either.
His take was that he doesn't care if they do, and understands some bands want to have a full orchestra sound even at live shows, but they shouldn't lie about it. I agree with that. Like for me, I saw Protest the Hero on Saturday, and it sounded nothing like his recordings, I could tell it was just him on the main vocals, and I could clearly tell when harmonies or whatever were being piped in, it wasn't hidden at all. Maybe it wasn't a 10/10 performance, but I MUCH preferred that it was a real performance that was like a 7/10 compared to the studio. And judging by the energy of the crowd, nobody else cared either. Put your ego aside...
I'm a (very) amateur vocalist who isn't the best at hitting perfect pitch all the time, but I'll be damned if I ever autotune or lip sync. I don't agree with the sentiment that we should just accept that's how it is now.
https://youtu.be/pBv64jWx8BM?si=VBdMZcxJdSJLE5hE
Rody is very adamant about his performances. He wants to give as authentic of an experience as he can, to be as real as possible. Hell, he even [wrote a song](https://open.spotify.com/track/4BPjLkiKvn1POvdt82Vtog?si=LGjIH_3hRziGvy8LxSo_UQ&context=spotify%3Aalbum%3A41UOAAfz3pZzLousKxvSEE) about how much he hates fake musicianship
I feel ya. I'm in the same boat as an amateur vocalist. Watched the video, I agree with his points. We use backing tracks with synths, effects and backing vocals. But they're intentionally down in the mix and only there to enhance the overall soundscape. The idea is always that we can play the show if the laptop goes down. I never put lead vocals on it. For me, I'd rather have a backing vocalist do an okay job than having the backtrack do the heavy lifting. It's just a matter of lacking bandmates for it, really.
After-shows are also basically networking events, so I can't just bring it up in casual conversation to the people I'm certain are doing it. So my default is usually just "Wow, this guy sure has good pitch".
I was so psyched that PTH is coming back to my neck of the woods later this year. I missed them last year during their halloween tour (I had no choice) but I kicked myself so hard for missing it.
> I saw Protest the Hero on Saturday, and it sounded nothing like his recordings, I could tell it was just him on the main vocals, and I could clearly tell when harmonies or whatever were being piped in, it wasn't hidden at all. Maybe it wasn't a 10/10 performance, but I MUCH preferred that it was a real performance that was like a 7/10 compared to the studio. And judging by the energy of the crowd, nobody else cared either. Put your ego aside...
I think you might be confusing a few things. I know what you mean about Protest the Hero I've seen them multiple times (I've stopped counting lol) including the night before you in Ottawa. Yes they have pre-recorded vocals played live but those are from guest vocalists on the albums (often female ones..!)
For example *Skies* is one of their best songs and they always play it live, but it features 3 guest singers, something their ultra succesful social funding campaing allowed them to do on Volition at the time. PtH doesn't have the means to bring guest singers on tour, especially not on a mini Ontario tour lol So yes it sounds a bit odd live, but the song is still pure fire so who cares?
Rody has had some vocal chord issues a few years ago (during the Fortress 10th anniversary tour, in the middle of the recording process of Palimpsest) but I thought he was in great shape last week (better than when I had last seen them exactly 2 years prior) and he nailed basically every song they played, from every record across their entire discography. Back vocals from Tim, Luke and Cam were also fine and not pre-recorded.
I have to say though, it was the second time in a row I was seeing PtH in that venue (Bronson Center), and the sound is thrash... After the third song I moved back near the sound console so I could at least hear the vocals a little. Bass was non-existent too, it was all drums and guitars.
It's definitely the venue, I don't like it.
I went to a free outdoor concert the week before (Karkwa, not prog metal), the sound was 10 times better and I could feel the bass rumbling in every single one of my body's cell lol
I think you are confused. I wasn't criticizing what Rody did. I was praising it.
And Rody actually apologized "for sounding like shit" because he drank after the Ottawa show. He didn't sound nearly as good as the records at some points, and the mic might have been too low for some of his airier vocals.
Point is, I could tell it was real, and the backing vocals that were played over speakers weren't done in a way that hides them as being recordings. No one was lip syncing to those parts. I'm praising that. I'm fine with that.
> And Rody actually apologized "for sounding like shit" because he drank after the Ottawa show. He didn't sound nearly as good as the records at some points, and the mic might have been too low for some of his airier vocals.
lol ok my bad.
performing two nights in a row must already be tough, I don't know how he can drink in between, especially with all his health issues (he talked about his bowels issue between two songs in Ottawa lol) and also considering he attended the Ribs Fest in Ottawa earlier friday (worst ribs fest he ever went to according to him lmao) so he was already "food drunk" on stage after.
If itās a clear the singer can actually sing and auto-tune is an *artistic choice* for a song or a section of a song (a la *Believe* by Cher) I could respect that and potentially get into it. Probably not if they did it constantly, however.
What Iām really talking about is what OP is talking about - auto tune as a crutch for a singer who canāt hack it live. Granted thereās probably a blurry line between artistic choice and crutch, but the closer it is to the latter the more likely I am to check out. I want to hear *people* perform music, not a computer algorithm.
I'm highly doubtful that most vocalists using it are doing it for the artistic effect. Yes, Cher and T-Pain exist. But in most music? Particularly in prog metal? You kinda have Cynic... not sure what else.
On Woe by An Abstract Illusion is also autotune as an effect. At first I did not like that effect, but because it's such a killer album I've grown to it.
Also Voices from the Fuselage use it quite a lot.
There's a difference between a vocoder effect (eg. Believe, by Cher) and auto-tune.
The latter is used to fix/correct out of tune vocals, or other instruments, and it's more of a "tell" to that lets you detect it's being used, rather than hearing it as a actual effect.
So it's more like "using autotune with a fretless bass to fix shitty intonation".
Vocalists have performed intensely and for long periods of time in live scenarios for hundreds of years. If auto tune is necessary for make a live performance listenable, the vocalist has failed to train and prepare adequately. Some people will accept it but listeners seeking authenticity won't.
Also, to your last point: no, auto tune live is not something that everyone does. In the studio, probably, but natural live vocals are, at this time, still more prevalent than tuned vocals for the majority of performing artists, at least locally. Backing tracks are another story.
I'm not some huge proponent for autotune or anything, but claiming it makes something less authentic is a bit misguided to me.
I don't know why we focus so much on pitch correction when there are other forms of hardware/software that make up for human error. Nobody goes "oh, Spencer is using a compressor, that means he's a bad singer and has no control over his dynamics and mic technique. So inauthentic." or "Wow his voice isn't really creating that slapback delay or hall reverb live, so inauthentic."
Why is pitch where we draw the line when it comes to putting on as good of a performance as we can? Sincere question. We don't act this way about EQ, compressors, limiters, reverbs, delays, stereo imagers, or saturators. So why is pitch the one thing people aren't allowed to correct without becoming inauthentic hacks?
Well, maybe because compression makes it fit in the mix better, delays and reverbs are just effects added to dry sound to make it sound nicer without modifying it, and pitch correction is almost always used as a poor fix of poor performance?
Compression is making up for mic technique and dynamic control though. EQ can be used to hide nasality or too dark/bright of a vocal timbre. Pitch correction helps a vocal sit better in the mix harmonically. We just really hyperfocus on pitch for whatever reason.
And it definitely isn't only used on bad performers. Obviously in studio and live are two different scenarios but on album you'll find very few records without it these days. And live if they're using a slow retune speed it's almost undetectable but still helping them out a great deal.
Idk, in a genre with a great deal of studio trickery and live backing tracks (which I'm fine with), it's weird that we draw the line at autotune/pitch correction. It's starting to feel like the generations before me that thought that people using digital DAWs instead of analog gear or used midi instruments instead of hiring an orchestra or session musicians were cheating or hacks.
Loud and quiet singing also sounds different tonally so it can make total sense to apply compression so it does not disappear in the mix in quiet parts and blows your head off in loud parts. Hiding nasality or altering timbre with EQ does not alter performance, it's essentially the same as using EQ on instruments. EQ changes tone, autotune replaces performance.
>And it definitely isn't only used on bad performers.
Yes, but most often it is. And I'd argue great performers don't benefit from autotune. There are much less poor live vocal performances in pre-autotune era then nowadays, because vocalists were forced to perform great. Now there is an option to somewhat fix out of tune singing. Of course music is not sport and "cheating" is completely irrelevant category here. Big issue for me is performance fixed by autotune is never great, it is just fine at best.
>but on album you'll find very few records without it these days.
And it sucks. Autotune everywhere makes it way too polished and unnatural. If vocal part is not intended to sound unnatural and robotic a little human imperfection makes it better, not worse. Also, if final performance is made by software, is there any reason to have vocalists in bands when AI can make the same thing not just a little easier but with zero effort, cool, isn't it?
Autotune doesn't replace the performance. It alters it.
We have a technique for singing quieter or singing louder, it's proper mic technique. Moving close on quiet bits and farther away on louder. But someone's not a hack for needing a compressor. Because it's a better option than relying on perfect technique. Just like in the studio on limited time and budget, pitch correction can be the only real option to get an album done, and live if someone wants to guarantee the best performance they can it's a notable option.
And see, AI actually *does* replace the performance. The person performing is no longer there. With pitch correction, it's just altering the frequency of the voice, not removing it and replacing it entirely. Not quite comparable.
>Autotune doesn't replace the performance
Well, if original performance is almost good then maybe. If it is way off then it still will tune it to the same pitch, so it doesn't really matter how you perform, result is more or less the same. If output does not really depend on input I think it's valid to call it a replacement.
>Just like in the studio on limited time and budget, pitch correction can be the only real option to get an album done
There is always an option to practice before going to the studio. I completely don't get how vocalist not being able to hit notes close enough are different from guitarists playing out of tune with Kirk-style "hard attack" or bending to nowhere. As for me in both cases someone should go fucking practice.
>The person performing is no longer there. With pitch correction, it's just altering the frequency of the voice, not removing it and replacing it entirely.
Singing is mostly speaking with specific rhythm and pitch, how the hell is altering frequency a "just" type of change, hitting desirable pitches is one of the biggest part of performance. If we go easy mode it doesn't make any sense to stop on autotune anymore, there are better tools to get the same mediocre or at best just fine results. If we want the best result possible those are not doable in easy mode.
People have been playing acoustic guitars and other stringed instruments adeptly for hundreds of years. Then someone came along and invented amps and effects. F'in' posers.
As a live sound professional I can assure you that "everyone's doing it" is just flat out bullshit, especially in prog metal (unless we're counting bands like Sleep Token and Bad Omens as prog metal). Pretty much none of the big guns is doing it, in fact those are the only 2 names that I can think of that are even closely related to prog metal (or even metal in general) that do.
Whether or not it's "ethical" to use it, my opinion is that bands that use it in the way the one you mentioned are coming from a place of insecurity, where they feel like they have to "polish" their show to standards that aren't really appropriate especially for a small-medium sized show. There's a higher chance that even the most "audio uneducated" audience will realize something's off, rather than them being disappointed about the singer's pitch not being dead on all the time. Live shows will always have a realness to them that gets projected, and autotuned vocals are the first thing that takes it away. Combine that with heavy use of backing tracks and yeah, that's the pitfall some young bands easily fall into these days.
Autotune as a deliberate and blatant effect however is completely appropriate if done right. I don't think anybody would have a problem with Cynic using it for their robotic vocals as an example.
Not the biggest Sleep Token head, but when I saw them at Copenhell 2023 there were definitely times where he was going for some high falcetto stuff and missed ever so slightly. So they were definitely not using auto-tune that time. Or maybe they toggled it dynamically during the show, I don't know. He got progressively more on-pitch the longer the show went on.
I am not very familiar with their live performances but I have watched videos of their latest tour and he's definitely using some there. Not too apparent as no one thinks he's a bad singer, far from it, and I wasn't trying to make it seem derogatory in any way, just pointing out an example of it. I have no experience of earlier shows so it may be a very recent thing.
There's plenty of good evidence vessel can sing though, and they use it as effect quite obviously in some songs.Ā
I expected Dayseeker to come up here. Unsure if they use auto tune, but the certainly process the heck out of the vocals live to get an effect similar to the recordings. It's impressive none the less (and I'm pretty sure that dude can sing). https://youtu.be/tIvkqWKZVeQ?si=MxYuj6jSx8EvW88g
Most certainly not! anyone that told you that is freaking dumb. I've seen them five times and not any of those times, Have I suspected him of doing that.
Hey man people are upset I even said it lol. I just remember it being discussed here a while back. Itās certainly being used on the albums according to consensus here.
It's basically pointless to talk about albums as every single artist at any level above "punk band in a garage" uses pitch correction. It's not frowned upon in any way, it's a completely logical thing to do as it can also be done manually and thus preserving the "human factor", just making more accurate where it needs to be. In the case of Haken, I have seen them many times and I can confirm there's absolutely 0% chance he's using autotune live
Myles Kennedy has went on record saying he refuses to use any amount of pitch correction. Not really genre related, but there are some freaks of nature that aren't auto tuning their vocals
Yeah, I think pitch correction used as a tool in the studio is fine (don't overdo it though, and don't use it as a crutch if you cannot sing in tune), but I want a more authentic live sound. Auto tune live feels lame and dishonest. I'd rather have an authentic, genuine, imperfect performance than have a polished, perfect, yet disingenuous performance.
Music isnāt a competition, so if it works for the band, good for them. I personally find it undesirable in my music tastes.
I like vocal effects a lot, especially with bands like Cynic, even cattle decaps vocoder songs are cool. But they add āeffectā to the tracks. The effects donāt take the load when it comes to skill. Theyāre not auto tuning because they canāt hit notes, ya know?
Did the band play well, despite the vocals? Did they put on a good show? Thatās more important in my mind.
Iām talkin about their songs like anthropogenic: end transmission, the great dying, etc. I know Travis doesnāt need effects to make disgusting noises :)
From the perspective of the live performing artist, I totally get it. Theyād rather have a few more attentive listeners ask āis that autotune?ā than have the whole audience think ādamn this guy canāt hit any notesā
Personally yeah Iād prefer if it wasnāt being used. I like to see mastery of instruments during a live performance. However, not every vocalist is capable of doing a studio performance in a live setting, thatās really difficult. I think we just need to accept that live autotune is going to be a thing in many shows.
Also from a performerās perspective as well as an audio engineer, sometimes getting monitoring situations in order for a live band is difficult in small / local shows if the venue/equipment doesnāt allow for doing it properly. So wonky stuff can happen when the musicians canāt hear themselves well enough, for example, like vocalists having a tough time knowing what pitch theyāre singing if they canāt hear themself sing, so autotune is sometimes put into the signal chain to correct this etc.
I donāt mind autotune and am not nearly as bothered by it as a lot of other people are (and they have the right to be, because opinions), so I donāt really see it as any different from singing into a heavy compressor or playing to a click track. Thereās ways that autotune can sound like shit if the settings are wrong or way too heavy-handed, and thereās ways to make it much more transparent and natural sounding. Better to do the latter.
Maybe. But I think what bothers me more than anything is the lack of honesty about it. But I don't really have an answer for when you would let your audience know you're being auto-tuned. I suppose my answer is just "Never. Don't auto-tune your vocals".
I find it highly problematic that the audience is, in broad terms, being lied to about what is going on on-stage. I think most people can understand that shows are much more prepared and backtrack heavy these days. But full-on auto-tuned vocals feels dishonest to me because it's not what I expect of a rock/metal show.
The question is, then, is it becoming normalized?
> I think we just need to accept that live autotune is going to be a thing in many show
If it becomes the norm, more power to you, but I will no longer be supporting bands that do so. Why would I pay to see them live rather just listen to them on my own time if it's going to sound exactly the same as in studio?
I think itās worth pointing out that thereās a wide range between lip syncing, t-pain style autotune, and more subtle autotune.
I donāt want to endorse autotune, Iād rather people didnāt use it live, but you gotta recognize it still takes skill to sing live even with some subtle autotune applied. Itās a live performance and things like vibrato, dynamics, rhythm are going to be legit. Autotune is also not a cheat code, if youāre really off the true note, itās going to tune you to the wrong note altogether and sound bad.
For me, it kinda depends on the genre. To borrow an example mentioned elsewhere, if Sleep Token or Bad Omens does it, which it's pretty clear they do, it doesn't bother me. Because these two bands are clearly making Pop music. And that's not bad! I like both of those bands, and I intend no derision. Pop is in part defined by this level of polish and aesthetic. But if you took a band like Symphony X or something, where the instrumental/vocal virtuosity is part of the intended package and aesthetic, I'd be disappointed. To borrow a more definitive Prog example, if Frost* or Vola used tuning, I'd be cool with it cause it matches what seems to be the priorities of the music.
I mean no offense, but unless you're involved on the tech side - enough to know their signal chain/processing, there's no way you can actually know that. And vice versa. I threw their name out there because I've seen enough footage to know at the least they use enough tracks and processing thay they're open to things like Tuning. But I don't know for sure either. For Bad Omens it's a clear choice they make. Same with like a Dayseeker. And again, for me I'm totally cool with it. Love all three of those bands.
This take lends to misinforming the general populace. Auto tune, especially in the studio, is not a ācrutch of bad singersā. Yes it can make a bad singer sound better but oftentimes it makes a great singer shine.
Pitch correction in the studio and autotune live, despite looking similar, are 2 completely different things that shouldn't even be discussed together. They involve totally different processes to achieve totally different goals.
I agree with that. The comment Iām responding to said āautotune ruins musicā not āautotune ruins live performancesā which are two different things. That is why I specified what I was talking about.
I mean I particularly stated in the studio as āruins musicā was fairly ambiguous. Iām not going to out singers for the sake of it but outside of prog, so many skilled vocalists use it for consistency. Depending on how inclusive you are of the term āprogā there are some in the genre who do too.
Ive never seen an actual singer with any talent use it and ive seen many who maybe should still not. Again seems like a crutch for people who lack talent.
My opinion has always been if you canāt do it live, donāt write it that way. But Iām not a singer so I donāt know how tough it is to stay consistent.
It's not about doing it live. It's about doing it live every single night as part of a 90 minute set for months at a time. Even trained classical vocalists experience vocal fatigue after that much use, regardless of pristine technique.
Oh Iām sure they do, I saw it in my own bands on tour. I just meant that sometimes people write beyond their ability and blow their shit out trying to match what was recorded when they were rested.
Yeah that's fair.
I just know that I have notes I can hit well, but I don't feel nearly as confident hitting them in a live show during a long set and with potentially bad monitoring. Like my safe studio high note is like a C but my safe live note is like a Bb lmao.
So I get why people would throw in their best notes on album and then maybe not have that same ability live.
But I guess that's different than like, completely faking it in the studio. I just think people really underestimate how obvious studio fakery can be if someone's genuinely a dogshit singer.
Yeah, not everyone has an ear for it if they donāt know what to listen for. Iām not gonna be the guy casting stones at anyone but I just like to see a little integrity.
I think tuning on recording is understandable, but yeah, unless it's being used as clear artistic effect or in cases of extreme emergency, I think it'd be best to not have any presence in live performances. Don't lie about your ability. When it shows, it shatters immersion in the performance, and good will in the performer.
I feel the same way about lip-syncing, with a caveat: if you're a performer with a lot of dance choreography, and you're going to lip sync... you'd damn well better do it convincingly. Flawlessly. Don't break the immersion of the audience.
Also, if a band is going to use backing tracks, it should be crystal clear when what's playing is a backing track. No miming, and no crossing streams. This is a bad example in part because Ne Obliviscaris is probably my favorite band to ever see live, but during one show Tim alternated between doing backing vocals in person on a part (supposedly) and letting a backing track play the vocals instead, and even though I appreciate that he didn't just pretend to mime the vocals he wasn't doing, it was still very distracting. Because it raises the question, "is he actually miming the ones he appears to be doing?" The blurring of what was real and what wasn't immediately removed some authenticity from the performance, and it took me 10 minutes to get back into the show afterwards. It would have been much better for them to just straight up not do the backing vocals that were playing on the backing track at all.
This is a complicated subject and I kinda hate that I'm forced to think about it at every show I go to because live embellishments have become so prevalent in modern music.
When I see someone live I want the raw and unfiltered. So what if theyāre occasionally off pitch or out of breath or a little raspy/hoarse? Thatās real and I want to hear a human sound from a human performer.
Tbh I even hate autotune in recordings. I can always hear it, it has this metallic digital sound attached to the voice that just masks the human element. That and, when the intervals are *too* clean, it just sounds unnatural.
Depends on the artist. Outside of prog, I donāt really care. Iām there to enjoy the songs in a live environment. As long as you can sell it to me, I donāt care how much production goes into it.
In prog, half of the enjoyment is seeing people whoāre ridiculously good performing near their peak ability. Autotune (or over reliance on backing tracks) would definitely worsen the experience for me.
Outside of prog, I think itās hella cool if someone can perform without autotune (Tallah for example) and it adds an element of disbelief. But I donāt look down upon bands that use it for the assist. Watching Bring Me the Horizon live is more visually stimulating than watching Archspire. But Iād leave the Archspire show with my mind blown, jaw on the floor, at how impeccably tight they are.
I know that Unprocessed use it live in certain very "processed" vocal parts. If it's CLEARLY an effect then okay, but if it's use to tune bad singing subtly, then no.
I'm not too opposed to it tbh but it also heavily depends on the group. If you're a pop singer and giving choreography and an elaborate performance then I'd expect some tuning on the vocals, but in this genre it's a bit more mixed. I think artists are held to unrealistically high standards, especially these days with the state of the music industry where musicians are forced to overwork themselves in order to survive and tour at a rate which doesn't allow them the rest they need to recover. Vocalists don't always get the break their voices need so they either have to risk damaging their voice to continue performing, cancel the shows and therefore not make money (money which a lot of bands these days *need* to survive), or use extra padding in the form of autotune etc. I also think in the past things like preserving your voice long-term and using proper technique have been neglected to some extent in some spaces.
It's also the byproduct of an industry in general where everything is expected to be "perfect" and sound identical to the studio recording 100% of the time. In the current social media era that expectation is put on people to always be perfect when that is not only literally impossible, but it's also the imperfections and variations which make live performances so special. I think artists are feeling pressure from this perfectionist mindset which has begun to seep its way into people's minds, even genres like this where it hasn't previously. Particularly for upcoming groups and singers I can see why they're made to believe or feel as though they they need autotune in order to not be seen as flawed.
Auto tune doesnāt work for harsh vocals, does it? You canāt fake those! And I prefer my metal with harsh over cleans any day.
DT should have started using auto tune 20 years ago!!
Depends on whether you think bands relying heavily on backing tracks is okay?
Some bands don't even sing live, just karaoke. Or they pipe in tons of backing vocals.
Or take Cynic for example. His whole aesthetic was about using autorune and vocoders.
>Depends on whether you think bands relying heavily on backing tracks is okay?
How so? Different aspects of a performance (or lack thereof) can affect you differently, surely? And everyone has their own limits and preferences?
I've amended the original question in the edit-section a bit as I suppose I didn't specify enough. I'm curious about what you think about auto-tune as an always-on pitch assistant, not as a particular artistic effect.
Tuning in the studio is completely normal and honestly I think itās fine because to me a studio recording is more about getting the ideal perfect version of a composition. Guitarists are double and quad tracking their parts, drums are getting quantized, theres synths doubling lead lines, etc. itās not a competition or to show off, itās āhereās the vision for what this song is, how do we make that into something people can listen to.ā If a vocalist gets the perfect inflection and delivery but is slightly out of tune, Iād rather hear that take than the one that was perfectly in tune but didnāt sell the emotion of the moment as well, and sometimes waiting for the best of both worlds is impractical.
I think live is a bit of a different story though. I go see live bands because I wanna see some dudes be really good at their instruments and blow me away. Tuning live isnāt super common as far as I know but I think itās kind of silly.
I'm a vocalist, but we're online only. I'd love to perform our stuff live, but we live in different parts of the country.
That said, performing our stuff live would definitely be difficult at times. I do the cleans and screams all myself. Obviously, I'd want to do as much of the vocals as I can myself. Switching between clean singing and screams over and over is incredibly difficult over long periods of time. Even with perfect screaming technique, it doesn't change the fact that it isn't an easy thing to do consistently over and over.
I don't have a vocal processor that would even allow me to do some minor pitch corrections. I've looked at them before and they're not cheap. I wouldn't fault a vocalist for using minor corrections live if they're the sole vocalist for a band. I'm more keen on just using a backing track or two, but their live performance is uncorrected and much higher in the mix than any backing tracks.
Just like you should be able to play live what you record/program, you should be able to sing it (at least to some extent). Exceptions would be modulation for effect, i.e. Four Stroke Baron, especially on the new album. Sleep Token I think use autotune and other effects as well, but it's for effect (Vessel is still singing his shit). If you're using it live due to skill, that's where I find a problem.
Definitely not into that and if it's that obvious then that singer is just flat out bad.
I also wasn't a huge fan of Earthside's live vocal tracks, but I fucking loved the rest of the performance. Far far better than Caligula's Horse, who headlined that tour last winter
If you can tell they are using it then they are a bad singer , when the singer is close enough to the notes auto tune can be a nice enhancement , if the notes are way off then you will hear the corrections happening which sounds super un natural
Honestly, I kind of take this a step further, and wish bands would even scale back the backing tracks. Click tracks seem like a losing battle, but I do feel like we are missing the "live" feel of live shows recently, because it's just bands trying to recreate what they do on record.
I'll use two examples. I saw Caligula's Horse recently, and all 4 of those dudes put on an absolutely fantastic performance, but I honestly feel like their backing tracks almost hurt more than help. I would rather just be able to hear what Sam is doing clearly instead of having all the keyboard/backing guitars piped in. Also the "bass drops" during the harder hitting moments are cool on record, but feels a little cheesy in concert.
Coheed are my favorite band ever, and I really, really miss their live energy. I understand they are a well-oiled machine with light shows aligned to their click tracks, and they do play flawlessly, and Claudio sings great, I just miss that energy from their IKS/Good Apollo days.
It's just been a minute since I've seen a band just set up and rip and it wasn't all perfectly timed with a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes.
I think autotune generally sucks and sounds extremely distinctive and very distracting. The only exception I have found where I actually like it is on the newest Coheed and Cambria album, cause Claudio uses it like an effect on his voice rather than relying on it.
It's not that clear cut. If you have a trustable in ear monitor and mix, then maybe auto-tune is a bit...cheaty. but I can also understand, as a vocalist, not wanting to depend on those and using auto-tune as a safety net.
Speaking for my own prog metal in which I do vocals, cleans are lightly tuned on our album, but I would never consider tuning them live personally. I'd rather keep whatever imperfections come out, for authenticity's sake. I'd also rather have the stress of performing live with no auto-tune make me practice that much harder than feel like the safety of auto-tune will carry me no matter what. That's a personal preference though, if a band wants to do it, I think it's fine as long as they don't lie about it.
I made a post last month about Sleep Token doing this. I only just discovered the band this year, and was extremely shocked when I went to their Chicago performance and was met with nearly an entire lip-synced setlist.
I'll never waste my money on that again. I didn't pay $300 to listen to a recorded album with zero moshing.
First concert since Covid and it felt like a waste.
It's worse than you think. Justin Bonitz of Tallah (featuring Mike Portnoy's son on drums) did a huge rant about this. About how bands he's seen are just piping in the entire performance through the speakers. Not even just vocals either. His take was that he doesn't care if they do, and understands some bands want to have a full orchestra sound even at live shows, but they shouldn't lie about it. I agree with that. Like for me, I saw Protest the Hero on Saturday, and it sounded nothing like his recordings, I could tell it was just him on the main vocals, and I could clearly tell when harmonies or whatever were being piped in, it wasn't hidden at all. Maybe it wasn't a 10/10 performance, but I MUCH preferred that it was a real performance that was like a 7/10 compared to the studio. And judging by the energy of the crowd, nobody else cared either. Put your ego aside... I'm a (very) amateur vocalist who isn't the best at hitting perfect pitch all the time, but I'll be damned if I ever autotune or lip sync. I don't agree with the sentiment that we should just accept that's how it is now. https://youtu.be/pBv64jWx8BM?si=VBdMZcxJdSJLE5hE
Rody is very adamant about his performances. He wants to give as authentic of an experience as he can, to be as real as possible. Hell, he even [wrote a song](https://open.spotify.com/track/4BPjLkiKvn1POvdt82Vtog?si=LGjIH_3hRziGvy8LxSo_UQ&context=spotify%3Aalbum%3A41UOAAfz3pZzLousKxvSEE) about how much he hates fake musicianship
That's why Rody is based.
Rody is the GOAT
I feel ya. I'm in the same boat as an amateur vocalist. Watched the video, I agree with his points. We use backing tracks with synths, effects and backing vocals. But they're intentionally down in the mix and only there to enhance the overall soundscape. The idea is always that we can play the show if the laptop goes down. I never put lead vocals on it. For me, I'd rather have a backing vocalist do an okay job than having the backtrack do the heavy lifting. It's just a matter of lacking bandmates for it, really. After-shows are also basically networking events, so I can't just bring it up in casual conversation to the people I'm certain are doing it. So my default is usually just "Wow, this guy sure has good pitch".
Yeah agreed, nothing wrong with some backing vocals as long as the guitarist isn't pretending to sing into a mic.
I was so psyched that PTH is coming back to my neck of the woods later this year. I missed them last year during their halloween tour (I had no choice) but I kicked myself so hard for missing it.
As a vocalist myself I completely agree with you!!
Tallah mentioned š£ļøš„š„š„š„
> I saw Protest the Hero on Saturday, and it sounded nothing like his recordings, I could tell it was just him on the main vocals, and I could clearly tell when harmonies or whatever were being piped in, it wasn't hidden at all. Maybe it wasn't a 10/10 performance, but I MUCH preferred that it was a real performance that was like a 7/10 compared to the studio. And judging by the energy of the crowd, nobody else cared either. Put your ego aside... I think you might be confusing a few things. I know what you mean about Protest the Hero I've seen them multiple times (I've stopped counting lol) including the night before you in Ottawa. Yes they have pre-recorded vocals played live but those are from guest vocalists on the albums (often female ones..!) For example *Skies* is one of their best songs and they always play it live, but it features 3 guest singers, something their ultra succesful social funding campaing allowed them to do on Volition at the time. PtH doesn't have the means to bring guest singers on tour, especially not on a mini Ontario tour lol So yes it sounds a bit odd live, but the song is still pure fire so who cares? Rody has had some vocal chord issues a few years ago (during the Fortress 10th anniversary tour, in the middle of the recording process of Palimpsest) but I thought he was in great shape last week (better than when I had last seen them exactly 2 years prior) and he nailed basically every song they played, from every record across their entire discography. Back vocals from Tim, Luke and Cam were also fine and not pre-recorded. I have to say though, it was the second time in a row I was seeing PtH in that venue (Bronson Center), and the sound is thrash... After the third song I moved back near the sound console so I could at least hear the vocals a little. Bass was non-existent too, it was all drums and guitars.
You mustve had a bad venue or sound engineer, because when i went to see them everything was very clear
It's definitely the venue, I don't like it. I went to a free outdoor concert the week before (Karkwa, not prog metal), the sound was 10 times better and I could feel the bass rumbling in every single one of my body's cell lol
I think you are confused. I wasn't criticizing what Rody did. I was praising it. And Rody actually apologized "for sounding like shit" because he drank after the Ottawa show. He didn't sound nearly as good as the records at some points, and the mic might have been too low for some of his airier vocals. Point is, I could tell it was real, and the backing vocals that were played over speakers weren't done in a way that hides them as being recordings. No one was lip syncing to those parts. I'm praising that. I'm fine with that.
> And Rody actually apologized "for sounding like shit" because he drank after the Ottawa show. He didn't sound nearly as good as the records at some points, and the mic might have been too low for some of his airier vocals. lol ok my bad. performing two nights in a row must already be tough, I don't know how he can drink in between, especially with all his health issues (he talked about his bowels issue between two songs in Ottawa lol) and also considering he attended the Ribs Fest in Ottawa earlier friday (worst ribs fest he ever went to according to him lmao) so he was already "food drunk" on stage after.
Yeah he was like "getting old sucks, I can't just drink all night and sing the next day". He's a great frontman, knows how to work the crowd.
Live auto tune would be a bridge too far for me personally.
What if thatās the sound they want? Isnāt that the same as saying āusing a distortion pedal is a bridge too far for me?ā
If itās a clear the singer can actually sing and auto-tune is an *artistic choice* for a song or a section of a song (a la *Believe* by Cher) I could respect that and potentially get into it. Probably not if they did it constantly, however. What Iām really talking about is what OP is talking about - auto tune as a crutch for a singer who canāt hack it live. Granted thereās probably a blurry line between artistic choice and crutch, but the closer it is to the latter the more likely I am to check out. I want to hear *people* perform music, not a computer algorithm.
I'm highly doubtful that most vocalists using it are doing it for the artistic effect. Yes, Cher and T-Pain exist. But in most music? Particularly in prog metal? You kinda have Cynic... not sure what else.
I've only heard a couple Sleep Token tunes but it was present on both.
Well they're hard pop, so that tracks.
On Woe by An Abstract Illusion is also autotune as an effect. At first I did not like that effect, but because it's such a killer album I've grown to it. Also Voices from the Fuselage use it quite a lot.
It doesn't matter if it's the sound they want. If the audience is not into it, they're not into it.
If a distortion pedal corrected any wrong notes, then yes it would be the same, but that's not what distortion pedals do.
There's a difference between a vocoder effect (eg. Believe, by Cher) and auto-tune. The latter is used to fix/correct out of tune vocals, or other instruments, and it's more of a "tell" to that lets you detect it's being used, rather than hearing it as a actual effect. So it's more like "using autotune with a fretless bass to fix shitty intonation".
Vocalists have performed intensely and for long periods of time in live scenarios for hundreds of years. If auto tune is necessary for make a live performance listenable, the vocalist has failed to train and prepare adequately. Some people will accept it but listeners seeking authenticity won't. Also, to your last point: no, auto tune live is not something that everyone does. In the studio, probably, but natural live vocals are, at this time, still more prevalent than tuned vocals for the majority of performing artists, at least locally. Backing tracks are another story.
I'm not some huge proponent for autotune or anything, but claiming it makes something less authentic is a bit misguided to me. I don't know why we focus so much on pitch correction when there are other forms of hardware/software that make up for human error. Nobody goes "oh, Spencer is using a compressor, that means he's a bad singer and has no control over his dynamics and mic technique. So inauthentic." or "Wow his voice isn't really creating that slapback delay or hall reverb live, so inauthentic." Why is pitch where we draw the line when it comes to putting on as good of a performance as we can? Sincere question. We don't act this way about EQ, compressors, limiters, reverbs, delays, stereo imagers, or saturators. So why is pitch the one thing people aren't allowed to correct without becoming inauthentic hacks?
Well, maybe because compression makes it fit in the mix better, delays and reverbs are just effects added to dry sound to make it sound nicer without modifying it, and pitch correction is almost always used as a poor fix of poor performance?
Compression is making up for mic technique and dynamic control though. EQ can be used to hide nasality or too dark/bright of a vocal timbre. Pitch correction helps a vocal sit better in the mix harmonically. We just really hyperfocus on pitch for whatever reason. And it definitely isn't only used on bad performers. Obviously in studio and live are two different scenarios but on album you'll find very few records without it these days. And live if they're using a slow retune speed it's almost undetectable but still helping them out a great deal. Idk, in a genre with a great deal of studio trickery and live backing tracks (which I'm fine with), it's weird that we draw the line at autotune/pitch correction. It's starting to feel like the generations before me that thought that people using digital DAWs instead of analog gear or used midi instruments instead of hiring an orchestra or session musicians were cheating or hacks.
Loud and quiet singing also sounds different tonally so it can make total sense to apply compression so it does not disappear in the mix in quiet parts and blows your head off in loud parts. Hiding nasality or altering timbre with EQ does not alter performance, it's essentially the same as using EQ on instruments. EQ changes tone, autotune replaces performance. >And it definitely isn't only used on bad performers. Yes, but most often it is. And I'd argue great performers don't benefit from autotune. There are much less poor live vocal performances in pre-autotune era then nowadays, because vocalists were forced to perform great. Now there is an option to somewhat fix out of tune singing. Of course music is not sport and "cheating" is completely irrelevant category here. Big issue for me is performance fixed by autotune is never great, it is just fine at best. >but on album you'll find very few records without it these days. And it sucks. Autotune everywhere makes it way too polished and unnatural. If vocal part is not intended to sound unnatural and robotic a little human imperfection makes it better, not worse. Also, if final performance is made by software, is there any reason to have vocalists in bands when AI can make the same thing not just a little easier but with zero effort, cool, isn't it?
Autotune doesn't replace the performance. It alters it. We have a technique for singing quieter or singing louder, it's proper mic technique. Moving close on quiet bits and farther away on louder. But someone's not a hack for needing a compressor. Because it's a better option than relying on perfect technique. Just like in the studio on limited time and budget, pitch correction can be the only real option to get an album done, and live if someone wants to guarantee the best performance they can it's a notable option. And see, AI actually *does* replace the performance. The person performing is no longer there. With pitch correction, it's just altering the frequency of the voice, not removing it and replacing it entirely. Not quite comparable.
>Autotune doesn't replace the performance Well, if original performance is almost good then maybe. If it is way off then it still will tune it to the same pitch, so it doesn't really matter how you perform, result is more or less the same. If output does not really depend on input I think it's valid to call it a replacement. >Just like in the studio on limited time and budget, pitch correction can be the only real option to get an album done There is always an option to practice before going to the studio. I completely don't get how vocalist not being able to hit notes close enough are different from guitarists playing out of tune with Kirk-style "hard attack" or bending to nowhere. As for me in both cases someone should go fucking practice. >The person performing is no longer there. With pitch correction, it's just altering the frequency of the voice, not removing it and replacing it entirely. Singing is mostly speaking with specific rhythm and pitch, how the hell is altering frequency a "just" type of change, hitting desirable pitches is one of the biggest part of performance. If we go easy mode it doesn't make any sense to stop on autotune anymore, there are better tools to get the same mediocre or at best just fine results. If we want the best result possible those are not doable in easy mode.
People have been playing acoustic guitars and other stringed instruments adeptly for hundreds of years. Then someone came along and invented amps and effects. F'in' posers.
As a live sound professional I can assure you that "everyone's doing it" is just flat out bullshit, especially in prog metal (unless we're counting bands like Sleep Token and Bad Omens as prog metal). Pretty much none of the big guns is doing it, in fact those are the only 2 names that I can think of that are even closely related to prog metal (or even metal in general) that do. Whether or not it's "ethical" to use it, my opinion is that bands that use it in the way the one you mentioned are coming from a place of insecurity, where they feel like they have to "polish" their show to standards that aren't really appropriate especially for a small-medium sized show. There's a higher chance that even the most "audio uneducated" audience will realize something's off, rather than them being disappointed about the singer's pitch not being dead on all the time. Live shows will always have a realness to them that gets projected, and autotuned vocals are the first thing that takes it away. Combine that with heavy use of backing tracks and yeah, that's the pitfall some young bands easily fall into these days. Autotune as a deliberate and blatant effect however is completely appropriate if done right. I don't think anybody would have a problem with Cynic using it for their robotic vocals as an example.
On the other hand Dream Theater should probably start doing it
Or the singer should pick a new key. Nothing wrong with getting old but ignoring it is kind of embarrassing.
Either that or replace James Labrie because he can't pull most of that stuff off anymore at a show.
I love dt and LaBrie but auto tune can't fix the awful tone he's started employing in the more recent years of his live performances
Haha yeah, although I think intonation is the least of Labrie's problems at the moment, from the videos I've seen of their latest tours.
Not the biggest Sleep Token head, but when I saw them at Copenhell 2023 there were definitely times where he was going for some high falcetto stuff and missed ever so slightly. So they were definitely not using auto-tune that time. Or maybe they toggled it dynamically during the show, I don't know. He got progressively more on-pitch the longer the show went on.
I am not very familiar with their live performances but I have watched videos of their latest tour and he's definitely using some there. Not too apparent as no one thinks he's a bad singer, far from it, and I wasn't trying to make it seem derogatory in any way, just pointing out an example of it. I have no experience of earlier shows so it may be a very recent thing.
There's plenty of good evidence vessel can sing though, and they use it as effect quite obviously in some songs.Ā I expected Dayseeker to come up here. Unsure if they use auto tune, but the certainly process the heck out of the vocals live to get an effect similar to the recordings. It's impressive none the less (and I'm pretty sure that dude can sing). https://youtu.be/tIvkqWKZVeQ?si=MxYuj6jSx8EvW88g
I thought Ross from Haken was being suspected of live auto tune. Maybe Iām misremembering.
Most certainly not! anyone that told you that is freaking dumb. I've seen them five times and not any of those times, Have I suspected him of doing that.
Hey man people are upset I even said it lol. I just remember it being discussed here a while back. Itās certainly being used on the albums according to consensus here.
It's basically pointless to talk about albums as every single artist at any level above "punk band in a garage" uses pitch correction. It's not frowned upon in any way, it's a completely logical thing to do as it can also be done manually and thus preserving the "human factor", just making more accurate where it needs to be. In the case of Haken, I have seen them many times and I can confirm there's absolutely 0% chance he's using autotune live
Iāve seen them live once. Seemed like an honest performance to me.
Myles Kennedy has went on record saying he refuses to use any amount of pitch correction. Not really genre related, but there are some freaks of nature that aren't auto tuning their vocals
Yeah, I think pitch correction used as a tool in the studio is fine (don't overdo it though, and don't use it as a crutch if you cannot sing in tune), but I want a more authentic live sound. Auto tune live feels lame and dishonest. I'd rather have an authentic, genuine, imperfect performance than have a polished, perfect, yet disingenuous performance.
Ya, auto-tune in the studio is pretty standard, even for the best singers. I don't think I've ever heard of somebody using it live though.
I've seen some videos of pop artists using it live, but it's rare that I've noticed it in a live performance or recording
Music isnāt a competition, so if it works for the band, good for them. I personally find it undesirable in my music tastes. I like vocal effects a lot, especially with bands like Cynic, even cattle decaps vocoder songs are cool. But they add āeffectā to the tracks. The effects donāt take the load when it comes to skill. Theyāre not auto tuning because they canāt hit notes, ya know? Did the band play well, despite the vocals? Did they put on a good show? Thatās more important in my mind.
Cattle decap doesnāt use a vocoder. Travis Ryan just sings that way
Iām talkin about their songs like anthropogenic: end transmission, the great dying, etc. I know Travis doesnāt need effects to make disgusting noises :)
I'll accept live autotune on one condition: James LaBrie has to start using it.
And there it is! Everybody drink!
From the perspective of the live performing artist, I totally get it. Theyād rather have a few more attentive listeners ask āis that autotune?ā than have the whole audience think ādamn this guy canāt hit any notesā Personally yeah Iād prefer if it wasnāt being used. I like to see mastery of instruments during a live performance. However, not every vocalist is capable of doing a studio performance in a live setting, thatās really difficult. I think we just need to accept that live autotune is going to be a thing in many shows.
Also from a performerās perspective as well as an audio engineer, sometimes getting monitoring situations in order for a live band is difficult in small / local shows if the venue/equipment doesnāt allow for doing it properly. So wonky stuff can happen when the musicians canāt hear themselves well enough, for example, like vocalists having a tough time knowing what pitch theyāre singing if they canāt hear themself sing, so autotune is sometimes put into the signal chain to correct this etc. I donāt mind autotune and am not nearly as bothered by it as a lot of other people are (and they have the right to be, because opinions), so I donāt really see it as any different from singing into a heavy compressor or playing to a click track. Thereās ways that autotune can sound like shit if the settings are wrong or way too heavy-handed, and thereās ways to make it much more transparent and natural sounding. Better to do the latter.
Maybe. But I think what bothers me more than anything is the lack of honesty about it. But I don't really have an answer for when you would let your audience know you're being auto-tuned. I suppose my answer is just "Never. Don't auto-tune your vocals". I find it highly problematic that the audience is, in broad terms, being lied to about what is going on on-stage. I think most people can understand that shows are much more prepared and backtrack heavy these days. But full-on auto-tuned vocals feels dishonest to me because it's not what I expect of a rock/metal show. The question is, then, is it becoming normalized?
> I think we just need to accept that live autotune is going to be a thing in many show If it becomes the norm, more power to you, but I will no longer be supporting bands that do so. Why would I pay to see them live rather just listen to them on my own time if it's going to sound exactly the same as in studio?
I think itās worth pointing out that thereās a wide range between lip syncing, t-pain style autotune, and more subtle autotune. I donāt want to endorse autotune, Iād rather people didnāt use it live, but you gotta recognize it still takes skill to sing live even with some subtle autotune applied. Itās a live performance and things like vibrato, dynamics, rhythm are going to be legit. Autotune is also not a cheat code, if youāre really off the true note, itās going to tune you to the wrong note altogether and sound bad.
For me, it kinda depends on the genre. To borrow an example mentioned elsewhere, if Sleep Token or Bad Omens does it, which it's pretty clear they do, it doesn't bother me. Because these two bands are clearly making Pop music. And that's not bad! I like both of those bands, and I intend no derision. Pop is in part defined by this level of polish and aesthetic. But if you took a band like Symphony X or something, where the instrumental/vocal virtuosity is part of the intended package and aesthetic, I'd be disappointed. To borrow a more definitive Prog example, if Frost* or Vola used tuning, I'd be cool with it cause it matches what seems to be the priorities of the music.
I saw Sleep Token live the other day and he doesnāt use auto tune live at all. Bad Omens absolutely does, though.
I mean no offense, but unless you're involved on the tech side - enough to know their signal chain/processing, there's no way you can actually know that. And vice versa. I threw their name out there because I've seen enough footage to know at the least they use enough tracks and processing thay they're open to things like Tuning. But I don't know for sure either. For Bad Omens it's a clear choice they make. Same with like a Dayseeker. And again, for me I'm totally cool with it. Love all three of those bands.
I think autotune ruins music and is the crutch of bad musicians and singers.
This take lends to misinforming the general populace. Auto tune, especially in the studio, is not a ācrutch of bad singersā. Yes it can make a bad singer sound better but oftentimes it makes a great singer shine.
Pitch correction in the studio and autotune live, despite looking similar, are 2 completely different things that shouldn't even be discussed together. They involve totally different processes to achieve totally different goals.
I agree with that. The comment Iām responding to said āautotune ruins musicā not āautotune ruins live performancesā which are two different things. That is why I specified what I was talking about.
Give me an example of a great singer who uses autotune live?
I mean I particularly stated in the studio as āruins musicā was fairly ambiguous. Iām not going to out singers for the sake of it but outside of prog, so many skilled vocalists use it for consistency. Depending on how inclusive you are of the term āprogā there are some in the genre who do too.
>so many skilled vocalists use it for consistency. Well, if they can't be consistent without it, are they really that skilled?
It depends what you want out of a vocalist. Everyone is down voting me because you all have the same perception as to what a skilled vocalist is, which is totally fine. But it isnāt a monolith and the fact that itās being treated as one is a little sad. Some vocalists, like Kyo from Dir En Grey, have a massive range of styles but it doesnāt always translate since theyāre always performing above their floor. In terms of range, timbres, and utilizes techniques, heās a legend. Pick a show at random and if heās having an off night, you might think less of him. On an on night, he literally sounds like a god. He doesnāt use auto tune, which I respect, but his inconsistency doesnāt take away from the fact that heās skilled. Itās almost like a physically talented basketball player that is injury prone. Sure theyāre only in play for half the season, but during that half the team isnāt dropping a game. Some prog vocalists are razor sharp, pitch perfect, and never drop a note but they have the most plain singing voice and only really use one or two techniques consistently. So while theyāre technically proficient and consistently perform, what theyāre actually able to do isnāt in the same league as Kyo. And for auto tune users, look at Arianna Grande and BeyoncĆ©. Theyāre both fantastic singers, technically proficient, and have awesome pitch night after night. They still use vocal correction on records to add a little extra spice on top. And on records, there are definitely a few modern prog vocalists who also use pitch correcting software on studio recordings. Theyāre all amazing singers but they are prioritizing the take (emotion, timing, etc) over pitch as it can be nudged in the right direction. Theyāre just so good itās not easy to notice. Autotune when used correctly is not a crutch. In live performances, if you donāt like it thatās totally fine and your prerogative. But itās an asinine implication that its usage in studio recordings is a sure tale sign of someoneās ability. In the world of recording, there are deadlines and budgets that need to be met where using pitch correction can help hasten the completion of projects. I understand the sanctity of human capability is important in prog but some of these remarks err on the side of elitism. Which I guess is somewhat inherent in more technical genres. Doesnāt seem like most people here are really down to hear it though so if you want to properly engage in the convo, Iād be happy to take it to the DMs.
Ive never seen an actual singer with any talent use it and ive seen many who maybe should still not. Again seems like a crutch for people who lack talent.
My opinion has always been if you canāt do it live, donāt write it that way. But Iām not a singer so I donāt know how tough it is to stay consistent.
It's not about doing it live. It's about doing it live every single night as part of a 90 minute set for months at a time. Even trained classical vocalists experience vocal fatigue after that much use, regardless of pristine technique.
Oh Iām sure they do, I saw it in my own bands on tour. I just meant that sometimes people write beyond their ability and blow their shit out trying to match what was recorded when they were rested.
Yeah that's fair. I just know that I have notes I can hit well, but I don't feel nearly as confident hitting them in a live show during a long set and with potentially bad monitoring. Like my safe studio high note is like a C but my safe live note is like a Bb lmao. So I get why people would throw in their best notes on album and then maybe not have that same ability live. But I guess that's different than like, completely faking it in the studio. I just think people really underestimate how obvious studio fakery can be if someone's genuinely a dogshit singer.
Yeah, not everyone has an ear for it if they donāt know what to listen for. Iām not gonna be the guy casting stones at anyone but I just like to see a little integrity.
I think tuning on recording is understandable, but yeah, unless it's being used as clear artistic effect or in cases of extreme emergency, I think it'd be best to not have any presence in live performances. Don't lie about your ability. When it shows, it shatters immersion in the performance, and good will in the performer. I feel the same way about lip-syncing, with a caveat: if you're a performer with a lot of dance choreography, and you're going to lip sync... you'd damn well better do it convincingly. Flawlessly. Don't break the immersion of the audience. Also, if a band is going to use backing tracks, it should be crystal clear when what's playing is a backing track. No miming, and no crossing streams. This is a bad example in part because Ne Obliviscaris is probably my favorite band to ever see live, but during one show Tim alternated between doing backing vocals in person on a part (supposedly) and letting a backing track play the vocals instead, and even though I appreciate that he didn't just pretend to mime the vocals he wasn't doing, it was still very distracting. Because it raises the question, "is he actually miming the ones he appears to be doing?" The blurring of what was real and what wasn't immediately removed some authenticity from the performance, and it took me 10 minutes to get back into the show afterwards. It would have been much better for them to just straight up not do the backing vocals that were playing on the backing track at all. This is a complicated subject and I kinda hate that I'm forced to think about it at every show I go to because live embellishments have become so prevalent in modern music.
When I see someone live I want the raw and unfiltered. So what if theyāre occasionally off pitch or out of breath or a little raspy/hoarse? Thatās real and I want to hear a human sound from a human performer. Tbh I even hate autotune in recordings. I can always hear it, it has this metallic digital sound attached to the voice that just masks the human element. That and, when the intervals are *too* clean, it just sounds unnatural.
Depends on the artist. Outside of prog, I donāt really care. Iām there to enjoy the songs in a live environment. As long as you can sell it to me, I donāt care how much production goes into it. In prog, half of the enjoyment is seeing people whoāre ridiculously good performing near their peak ability. Autotune (or over reliance on backing tracks) would definitely worsen the experience for me. Outside of prog, I think itās hella cool if someone can perform without autotune (Tallah for example) and it adds an element of disbelief. But I donāt look down upon bands that use it for the assist. Watching Bring Me the Horizon live is more visually stimulating than watching Archspire. But Iād leave the Archspire show with my mind blown, jaw on the floor, at how impeccably tight they are.
I know that Unprocessed use it live in certain very "processed" vocal parts. If it's CLEARLY an effect then okay, but if it's use to tune bad singing subtly, then no.
I'm not too opposed to it tbh but it also heavily depends on the group. If you're a pop singer and giving choreography and an elaborate performance then I'd expect some tuning on the vocals, but in this genre it's a bit more mixed. I think artists are held to unrealistically high standards, especially these days with the state of the music industry where musicians are forced to overwork themselves in order to survive and tour at a rate which doesn't allow them the rest they need to recover. Vocalists don't always get the break their voices need so they either have to risk damaging their voice to continue performing, cancel the shows and therefore not make money (money which a lot of bands these days *need* to survive), or use extra padding in the form of autotune etc. I also think in the past things like preserving your voice long-term and using proper technique have been neglected to some extent in some spaces. It's also the byproduct of an industry in general where everything is expected to be "perfect" and sound identical to the studio recording 100% of the time. In the current social media era that expectation is put on people to always be perfect when that is not only literally impossible, but it's also the imperfections and variations which make live performances so special. I think artists are feeling pressure from this perfectionist mindset which has begun to seep its way into people's minds, even genres like this where it hasn't previously. Particularly for upcoming groups and singers I can see why they're made to believe or feel as though they they need autotune in order to not be seen as flawed.
Auto tune doesnāt work for harsh vocals, does it? You canāt fake those! And I prefer my metal with harsh over cleans any day. DT should have started using auto tune 20 years ago!!
people have been using live pitch correction for decades, but it's definitely **not** an "everyone does it" type of thing.
Depends on whether you think bands relying heavily on backing tracks is okay? Some bands don't even sing live, just karaoke. Or they pipe in tons of backing vocals. Or take Cynic for example. His whole aesthetic was about using autorune and vocoders.
>Depends on whether you think bands relying heavily on backing tracks is okay? How so? Different aspects of a performance (or lack thereof) can affect you differently, surely? And everyone has their own limits and preferences? I've amended the original question in the edit-section a bit as I suppose I didn't specify enough. I'm curious about what you think about auto-tune as an always-on pitch assistant, not as a particular artistic effect.
Tuning in the studio is completely normal and honestly I think itās fine because to me a studio recording is more about getting the ideal perfect version of a composition. Guitarists are double and quad tracking their parts, drums are getting quantized, theres synths doubling lead lines, etc. itās not a competition or to show off, itās āhereās the vision for what this song is, how do we make that into something people can listen to.ā If a vocalist gets the perfect inflection and delivery but is slightly out of tune, Iād rather hear that take than the one that was perfectly in tune but didnāt sell the emotion of the moment as well, and sometimes waiting for the best of both worlds is impractical. I think live is a bit of a different story though. I go see live bands because I wanna see some dudes be really good at their instruments and blow me away. Tuning live isnāt super common as far as I know but I think itās kind of silly.
I don't see a difference between using autotune vs say, triggered drums.
I'm a vocalist, but we're online only. I'd love to perform our stuff live, but we live in different parts of the country. That said, performing our stuff live would definitely be difficult at times. I do the cleans and screams all myself. Obviously, I'd want to do as much of the vocals as I can myself. Switching between clean singing and screams over and over is incredibly difficult over long periods of time. Even with perfect screaming technique, it doesn't change the fact that it isn't an easy thing to do consistently over and over. I don't have a vocal processor that would even allow me to do some minor pitch corrections. I've looked at them before and they're not cheap. I wouldn't fault a vocalist for using minor corrections live if they're the sole vocalist for a band. I'm more keen on just using a backing track or two, but their live performance is uncorrected and much higher in the mix than any backing tracks.
Just like you should be able to play live what you record/program, you should be able to sing it (at least to some extent). Exceptions would be modulation for effect, i.e. Four Stroke Baron, especially on the new album. Sleep Token I think use autotune and other effects as well, but it's for effect (Vessel is still singing his shit). If you're using it live due to skill, that's where I find a problem.
Definitely not into that and if it's that obvious then that singer is just flat out bad. I also wasn't a huge fan of Earthside's live vocal tracks, but I fucking loved the rest of the performance. Far far better than Caligula's Horse, who headlined that tour last winter
Wouldnāt Earthside just place the singled out vocals from their recording?
Yes, it was quite uncanny
Anyone who says "everyone's doing it, that's just how it is now" as justification for their decisions should be scrutinized heavily.
If you can tell they are using it then they are a bad singer , when the singer is close enough to the notes auto tune can be a nice enhancement , if the notes are way off then you will hear the corrections happening which sounds super un natural
Honestly, I kind of take this a step further, and wish bands would even scale back the backing tracks. Click tracks seem like a losing battle, but I do feel like we are missing the "live" feel of live shows recently, because it's just bands trying to recreate what they do on record. I'll use two examples. I saw Caligula's Horse recently, and all 4 of those dudes put on an absolutely fantastic performance, but I honestly feel like their backing tracks almost hurt more than help. I would rather just be able to hear what Sam is doing clearly instead of having all the keyboard/backing guitars piped in. Also the "bass drops" during the harder hitting moments are cool on record, but feels a little cheesy in concert. Coheed are my favorite band ever, and I really, really miss their live energy. I understand they are a well-oiled machine with light shows aligned to their click tracks, and they do play flawlessly, and Claudio sings great, I just miss that energy from their IKS/Good Apollo days. It's just been a minute since I've seen a band just set up and rip and it wasn't all perfectly timed with a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes.
I think autotune generally sucks and sounds extremely distinctive and very distracting. The only exception I have found where I actually like it is on the newest Coheed and Cambria album, cause Claudio uses it like an effect on his voice rather than relying on it.
It's not that clear cut. If you have a trustable in ear monitor and mix, then maybe auto-tune is a bit...cheaty. but I can also understand, as a vocalist, not wanting to depend on those and using auto-tune as a safety net.
Speaking for my own prog metal in which I do vocals, cleans are lightly tuned on our album, but I would never consider tuning them live personally. I'd rather keep whatever imperfections come out, for authenticity's sake. I'd also rather have the stress of performing live with no auto-tune make me practice that much harder than feel like the safety of auto-tune will carry me no matter what. That's a personal preference though, if a band wants to do it, I think it's fine as long as they don't lie about it.
I'm so tone deaf, I can't pretend to care.
I made a post last month about Sleep Token doing this. I only just discovered the band this year, and was extremely shocked when I went to their Chicago performance and was met with nearly an entire lip-synced setlist. I'll never waste my money on that again. I didn't pay $300 to listen to a recorded album with zero moshing. First concert since Covid and it felt like a waste.
> How does everyone feel about this? I don't give a fucking fuck. If I was a purist then I'd be appalled at the myriad effects on other instruments.
Is having frets on a guitar cheating? Shouldn't everyone just play fretless?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I don't even mind autotune really, but this is just untrue.