|
 With the technology that is available today, you don't need to know how to sing to be a famous singer. Today's recording technology can turn your out-of-tune chirping into perfectly pitched purring. And the technology to do this is cheap--so cheap in fact that it's free.
Most non-musicians are not aware of the technological tweaking that is done to turn those pop tunes you hear on the radio into the most-downloaded files on the planet.
It started with a little software program called Antares Autotune. This magic code reads the notes you sing into it and "corrects" the pitch of the notes. If you're a little flat, it will boost your pitch. And if your pitch trembles, it can flatten your voice.
It's not easy to tell who is using the technology and who isn't, but I would place bets that it's used by nearly every major recording artist heard on the radio today. The sound of it can be subtle, but it is noticeable once you know what to listen for.
There's a great article over at Hometracked.com that explains how to spot pitch correction, and demonstrates the abuse of pitch correction technology. The article includes an MP3 you can download with some great examples of pitch correction abuse: Auto-Tune Abuse in Pop Music - 10 Examples
Remember that song by Cher called "Believe" in which her voice sounds like a computer yodeling? The producers of Cher's song used extreme auto-tuning to create that sound intentionally. But when auto-tune is used poorly to correct off-pitch notes "the Cher effect" is the unintended give-away. If you hear subtle "Cher Effects" in recordings you'll know it's a result of auto-tuning.
Beauty in Imperfection
One problem with pitch correction is that there is beauty in imperfection. There is life in the little gaffes that singers make. I've made my share of clams in recordings, but after I hear the recording a few times those clams don't sound like mistakes any longer. They become a part of the music, they are the music.
Another problem with pitch correction is that so many of the singers of today are starting to sound similar. It's difficult to create the sound of blues singers like Bessie Smith who sweep into a note, gently rising up to the correct pitch. When you auto-tune a vocal, it can take the life out of the performance.
I'm not against technology. I love computers and my PDA cell phone which I couldn't live without (though my girlfriend hates it). Technology can be used to create new sounds, new ways of performing music. And technology has enabled musicians to record albums for very little cost. But there's a point at which the use of technology can destroy the art of a song.
How can we tell who is a good singer and who isn't today? What is our definition of a good singer if anyone can sound "good" on a recording? It would be nice if we could test someone's actual singing ability be seeing them perform live in concert, but unfortunately most top recording artists today don't sing live. Sure, they "perform" live, but they're actually singing along to a backing track that is pre-recorded and probably auto-tuned.
And if you think your favourite pop or rock band "would never do that," think again. I was surprised when I heard Coldplay live in Vancouver. When Chris Martin took his hands off the piano keys, the piano was magically still playing for another 5 seconds! And I felt like I was the only person in the audience who actually noticed.
So what do we call singers who sing, but don't sing? What do we call musicians who play instruments, but don't play instruments? I suggest we call them "performers," not singers or musicians. Being able to dance on stage while lip-syncing does not make you a singer, no matter how cool your clothes are. They've still yet to come up with an iTalent software plugin.
Trackback(0)
 |
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed