[DariaSimic]

Hello

When I was on a forum for fans of a popular singer an argument broke
out between this guy and these two girls about a particular song that
was included in the 2nd leg of the tour. One of the girls (who I know
is married to a vocal coach so she should know what she's talking
about) said when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy. She was up close and went to a few of the
concerts.

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him what
autotune does to your voice. He did say that these were very few and
far between and that he doesn't think that they use it that often, if
at all. Then another women said that at the end of the tour the
singer had gone sharp on the high C.

So taking all this into account do you think it was possible that
autotune was in use on a low setting for certain parts of the tour or
maybe it was on such a low setting that it didn't correct the high C.
This guy did say that he couldn't be sure that this was autotune that
he was hearing and certainly at a big concert it could be anything
which he heard. Do you think it was possible that the singer on some
night fet their voice was a bit rough and thought autotune would help?

Also, the women said that they have never seen the autotune boxes at
their concerts. Does this box have to be situated in the PA area or
can it be under the stage?

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
,
DariaSimic wrote:

Hello

When I was on a forum for fans of a popular singer an argument broke
out between this guy and these two girls about a particular song that
was included in the 2nd leg of the tour. One of the girls (who I know
is married to a vocal coach so she should know what she's talking
about) said when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy. She was up close and went to a few of the
concerts.

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him what
autotune does to your voice. He did say that these were very few and
far between and that he doesn't think that they use it that often, if
at all. Then another women said that at the end of the tour the
singer had gone sharp on the high C.

So taking all this into account do you think it was possible that
autotune was in use on a low setting for certain parts of the tour or
maybe it was on such a low setting that it didn't correct the high C.
This guy did say that he couldn't be sure that this was autotune that
he was hearing and certainly at a big concert it could be anything
which he heard. Do you think it was possible that the singer on some
night fet their voice was a bit rough and thought autotune would help?

Also, the women said that they have never seen the autotune boxes at
their concerts. Does this box have to be situated in the PA area or
can it be under the stage?

I didn't know that pitch correction was used live. To me, this is
terrible news. Bad enough, IMO, that it's used for recordings.

[Arny Krueger]

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
,
DariaSimic wrote:

Hello

When I was on a forum for fans of a popular singer an
argument broke out between this guy and these two girls
about a particular song that was included in the 2nd leg
of the tour. One of the girls (who I know is married to
a vocal coach so she should know what she's talking
about) said when they sang a particular high note in
this song at times it was pitchy. She was up close and
went to a few of the concerts.

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper
range of their voice he thought he heard naunces that
people have told him what autotune does to your voice.
He did say that these were very few and far between and
that he doesn't think that they use it that often, if at
all. Then another women said that at the end of the
tour the singer had gone sharp on the high C.

So taking all this into account do you think it was
possible that autotune was in use on a low setting for
certain parts of the tour or maybe it was on such a low
setting that it didn't correct the high C. This guy did
say that he couldn't be sure that this was autotune that
he was hearing and certainly at a big concert it could
be anything which he heard. Do you think it was
possible that the singer on some night fet their voice
was a bit rough and thought autotune would help?

Also, the women said that they have never seen the
autotune boxes at their concerts. Does this box have to
be situated in the PA area or can it be under the stage?

I didn't know that pitch correction was used live.

http://www.antarestech.com/

To me, this is terrible news. Bad enough, IMO, that it's
used for recordings.

Autotune is sometimes overused as an EFX, live or recorded. No intent that
its effects not be noticed.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"Arny Krueger" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
,
DariaSimic wrote:

Hello

When I was on a forum for fans of a popular singer an
argument broke out between this guy and these two girls
about a particular song that was included in the 2nd leg
of the tour. One of the girls (who I know is married to
a vocal coach so she should know what she's talking
about) said when they sang a particular high note in
this song at times it was pitchy. She was up close and
went to a few of the concerts.

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper
range of their voice he thought he heard naunces that
people have told him what autotune does to your voice.
He did say that these were very few and far between and
that he doesn't think that they use it that often, if at
all. Then another women said that at the end of the
tour the singer had gone sharp on the high C.

So taking all this into account do you think it was
possible that autotune was in use on a low setting for
certain parts of the tour or maybe it was on such a low
setting that it didn't correct the high C. This guy did
say that he couldn't be sure that this was autotune that
he was hearing and certainly at a big concert it could
be anything which he heard. Do you think it was
possible that the singer on some night fet their voice
was a bit rough and thought autotune would help?

Also, the women said that they have never seen the
autotune boxes at their concerts. Does this box have to
be situated in the PA area or can it be under the stage?

I didn't know that pitch correction was used live.

http://www.antarestech.com/

To me, this is terrible news. Bad enough, IMO, that it's
used for recordings.

Autotune is sometimes overused as an EFX, live or recorded. No intent that
its effects not be noticed.

Yes, I know of the "Cher effect" for example. As an effect, that's one
thing, but to "fix" a performer's bad performance...blech!

[yrret]

"DariaSimic" wrote in message
...
Hello

When I was on a forum for fans of a popular singer an argument broke
out between this guy and these two girls about a particular song that
was included in the 2nd leg of the tour. One of the girls (who I know
is married to a vocal coach so she should know what she's talking
about) said when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy. She was up close and went to a few of the
concerts.

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him what
autotune does to your voice. He did say that these were very few and
far between and that he doesn't think that they use it that often, if
at all. Then another women said that at the end of the tour the
singer had gone sharp on the high C.

So taking all this into account do you think it was possible that
autotune was in use on a low setting for certain parts of the tour or
maybe it was on such a low setting that it didn't correct the high C.
This guy did say that he couldn't be sure that this was autotune that
he was hearing and certainly at a big concert it could be anything
which he heard. Do you think it was possible that the singer on some
night fet their voice was a bit rough and thought autotune would help?

Also, the women said that they have never seen the autotune boxes at
their concerts. Does this box have to be situated in the PA area or
can it be under the stage?

Why so coy? Who's the singer? You would probably get a better answer.
Vocal effects/shapers are starting to be sold like guitar pedals so its not
really the shameful thing it used to be.

[Mike Rivers]

DariaSimic wrote:

when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy.

"Pitchy?" Is that the politically correct way to say "out of tune" now?

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him what
autotune does to your voice.

I don't know if he heard "nuances" or not, but it's not unusual these
days to run a hardware pitch corrector on certain singers in a live
show. Hey, it's more honest than playing a pre-recorded track, isn't it?
Was it AutoTune (or t.c. or Digitech) on this show? Only her hairdresser
knows.

By the way, Digitech has a stomp box pitch corrector, so it can
definitely be on stage. It's kind of semi-pro, though, the sort of thing
you'd find with a lounge lizard act. A big bucks act would likely have a
rack mount unit at the PA console. It looks just like any other rack
mounted signal processor, so someone would have to know what she was
looking for to say for sure if there was or wasn't one at the show.




--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article xFP8k.32$wR.4@trnddc07, Mike Rivers
wrote:

DariaSimic wrote:

when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy.

"Pitchy?" Is that the politically correct way to say "out of tune" now?

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him what
autotune does to your voice.

I don't know if he heard "nuances" or not, but it's not unusual these
days to run a hardware pitch corrector on certain singers in a live
show. Hey, it's more honest than playing a pre-recorded track, isn't it?

Barely, imo.

[yrret]

definitely be on stage. It's kind of semi-pro, though, the sort of thing
you'd find with a lounge lizard

lol, in my parts a insert location lizard is slang for a prostitute.

[Chris Whealy]

Jenn wrote
Yes, I know of the "Cher effect" for example. As an effect, that's one
thing, but to "fix" a performer's bad performance...blech!

We had a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. Although a /similar/
effect can be produced using an Antares autotune, the "Cher Effect" was
created by a Korg VC10 analogue vocoder.

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[gareth magennis]

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article xFP8k.32$wR.4@trnddc07, Mike Rivers
wrote:

DariaSimic wrote:

when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy.

"Pitchy?" Is that the politically correct way to say "out of tune" now?

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him what
autotune does to your voice.

I don't know if he heard "nuances" or not, but it's not unusual these
days to run a hardware pitch corrector on certain singers in a live
show. Hey, it's more honest than playing a pre-recorded track, isn't it?

Barely, imo.


Well this box is going to horrify you then.

http://www.digitech.com/products/Voc...epro/index.php


Not only can you sing in tune, you can sing additional 4 part harmonies at
the same time. Marvelous.



Gareth.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"Gareth Magennis" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article xFP8k.32$wR.4@trnddc07, Mike Rivers
wrote:

DariaSimic wrote:

when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy.

"Pitchy?" Is that the politically correct way to say "out of tune" now?

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him what
autotune does to your voice.

I don't know if he heard "nuances" or not, but it's not unusual these
days to run a hardware pitch corrector on certain singers in a live
show. Hey, it's more honest than playing a pre-recorded track, isn't it?

Barely, imo.


Well this box is going to horrify you then.

http://www.digitech.com/products/Voc...epro/index.php

You're right; it does! ;-)



Not only can you sing in tune, you can sing additional 4 part harmonies at
the same time. Marvelous.



Gareth.

[Scott Dorsey]

DariaSimic wrote:

So taking all this into account do you think it was possible that
autotune was in use on a low setting for certain parts of the tour or
maybe it was on such a low setting that it didn't correct the high C.
This guy did say that he couldn't be sure that this was autotune that
he was hearing and certainly at a big concert it could be anything
which he heard. Do you think it was possible that the singer on some
night fet their voice was a bit rough and thought autotune would help?

Some people have used autotune live. It doesn't work very well. It
is very difficult to control and invariably has severe artifacts that
are very obvious. But they have used them anyway.

It would be easier just to record the vocal track in the studio and
lipsync to it on playback if you aren't sure you can do the thing.
Plenty of folks do that live today, too.

Also, the women said that they have never seen the autotune boxes at
their concerts. Does this box have to be situated in the PA area or
can it be under the stage?

You could put it anywhere, but why bother? It would probably be at the
FOB position with everything else, and I doubt anyone would ever bother
to hide it. It's no secret when people do this stuff.

Most big rock shows are just that... they are shows, and they employ all
sorts of gimmickery to make them more exciting and impressive. If you
want to hear real live acoustic music played by actual musicians, go to
your local symphony instead. They need the money, too.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[gareth magennis]

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Gareth Magennis" wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message
...
In article xFP8k.32$wR.4@trnddc07, Mike Rivers
wrote:

DariaSimic wrote:

when they sang a particular high note in this song at
times it was pitchy.

"Pitchy?" Is that the politically correct way to say "out of tune"
now?

However this guy said that during the tour, on the upper range of
their voice he thought he heard naunces that people have told him
what
autotune does to your voice.

I don't know if he heard "nuances" or not, but it's not unusual these
days to run a hardware pitch corrector on certain singers in a live
show. Hey, it's more honest than playing a pre-recorded track, isn't
it?

Barely, imo.


Well this box is going to horrify you then.

http://www.digitech.com/products/Voc...epro/index.php

You're right; it does! ;-)




This is funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYIMmi7JtHc

Gareth.

[gareth magennis]

Here's something quite impressive.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFCjv4_jqAY




Gareth.

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article ,
"Gareth Magennis" wrote:

Here's something quite impressive.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFCjv4_jqAY




Gareth.

Yeah, this was in the NYT on Sunday.

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

Chris Whealy wrote:
Jenn wrote
Yes, I know of the "Cher effect" for example. As an effect, that's
one thing, but to "fix" a performer's bad performance...blech!

We had a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. Although a /similar/
effect can be produced using an Antares autotune, the "Cher Effect" was
created by a Korg VC10 analogue vocoder.

Chris W


Actually they lied about that, it was Autotune.

[gareth magennis]

"Romeo Rondeau" wrote in message
...
Chris Whealy wrote:
Jenn wrote
Yes, I know of the "Cher effect" for example. As an effect, that's one
thing, but to "fix" a performer's bad performance...blech!

We had a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. Although a /similar/
effect can be produced using an Antares autotune, the "Cher Effect" was
created by a Korg VC10 analogue vocoder.

Chris W


Actually they lied about that, it was Autotune.


Oh really? Take a listen to this then, while trying to ignore the
ridiculous remix. It uses just the vocal sample, and it is quite clearly
NOT autotune. Not even close.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f17vq4ov8U


Gareth.

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 26/06/08 19:21, in article , "Chris Whealy"
wrote:

Jenn wrote
Yes, I know of the "Cher effect" for example. As an effect, that's one
thing, but to "fix" a performer's bad performance...blech!

We had a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. Although a /similar/
effect can be produced using an Antares autotune, the "Cher Effect" was
created by a Korg VC10 analogue vocoder.

Nope.

"I played around with the vocals and realised that the vocoder effect could
work, but not with the Korg -- the results just weren't clear enough. So
instead, I used a Digitech Talker -- a reasonably new piece of kit that
looks like an old guitar foot pedal, which I suspect is what it was
originally designed for [see review in SOS April '98]. You plug your mic
straight into it, and it gives you a vocoder-like effect, but with clarity;
it almost sounds like you've got the original voice coming out the other
end. I used a tone from the Nord Rack as a carrier signal and sequenced the
notes the Nord was playing from Cubase to follow Cher's vocal melody."

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb9.../tracks661.htm

--
Joe Kotroczo

[philicorda[_6_]]

On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:13:51 +0000, Gareth Magennis wrote:

"Romeo Rondeau" wrote in message
...
Chris Whealy wrote:
Jenn wrote
Yes, I know of the "Cher effect" for example. As an effect, that's
one thing, but to "fix" a performer's bad performance...blech!

We had a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. Although a
/similar/ effect can be produced using an Antares autotune, the "Cher
Effect" was created by a Korg VC10 analogue vocoder.

Chris W


Actually they lied about that, it was Autotune.


Oh really? Take a listen to this then, while trying to ignore the
ridiculous remix. It uses just the vocal sample, and it is quite
clearly NOT autotune. Not even close.

Sounds like autotune to me. Perhaps you don't abuse it enough.

It's not as simple as just turning it to max though. You'd have to mess
around with real time tuning (for the glitchy bits), graphical tuning
(for the clamped notes), and editing a load of differently effected takes
together.

There is an interesting addendum to the 1999 Sound on Sound interview
with the producer of the track:

"In February 1999, when this Sound On Sound article was published, the
producers of this recording were apparently so keen to maintain their
'trade secret' process that they were willing to attribute the effect to
the (then) recently-released Digitech Talker vocoder pedal. As most
people are now all-too familiar with the 'Cher effect', as it became
known, we have maintained the article in its original form as an
interesting historical footnote."

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

Gareth Magennis wrote:
"Romeo Rondeau" wrote in message
...
Chris Whealy wrote:
Jenn wrote
Yes, I know of the "Cher effect" for example. As an effect, that's one
thing, but to "fix" a performer's bad performance...blech!

We had a thread about this a couple of weeks ago. Although a /similar/
effect can be produced using an Antares autotune, the "Cher Effect" was
created by a Korg VC10 analogue vocoder.

Chris W

Actually they lied about that, it was Autotune.


Oh really? Take a listen to this then, while trying to ignore the
ridiculous remix. It uses just the vocal sample, and it is quite clearly
NOT autotune. Not even close.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1f17vq4ov8U


Gareth.



It's common knowledge that they lied about the vocoder. It's Autotune
that makes the stair steppy sound, they is other effects on it, but the
main effect is Autotune. They made up the story about the vocoder to
throw people off who would copy the effect. It didn't work.

[Joe Kotroczo]

On 26/06/08 21:38, in article ,
"philicorda" wrote:

(...)
There is an interesting addendum to the 1999 Sound on Sound interview
with the producer of the track:

"In February 1999, when this Sound On Sound article was published, the
producers of this recording were apparently so keen to maintain their
'trade secret' process that they were willing to attribute the effect to
the (then) recently-released Digitech Talker vocoder pedal. As most
people are now all-too familiar with the 'Cher effect', as it became
known, we have maintained the article in its original form as an
interesting historical footnote."

Oops!

--
Joe Kotroczo

[rboy]

On Jun 26, 2:30*pm, "Gareth Magennis"
wrote:
Here's something quite impressive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFCjv4_jqAY


That's really amazing. What's more amazing is that they let the
narrator mispronounce "monophonic" and "midi".

[Mike Rivers]

Romeo Rondeau wrote:

Actually they lied about that, it was Autotune.

Actually, the lie was a lie. The producer was tapping on her throat.

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

Mike Rivers wrote:
Romeo Rondeau wrote:

Actually they lied about that, it was Autotune.

Actually, the lie was a lie. The producer was tapping on her throat.


At her age, he should be tapping on her chest to make sure she's still
alive :-)

[Chris Whealy]

Joe Kotroczo wrote:
On 26/06/08 21:38, in article ,
"philicorda" wrote:

(...)

There is an interesting addendum to the 1999 Sound on Sound interview
with the producer of the track:

"In February 1999, when this Sound On Sound article was published, the
producers of this recording were apparently so keen to maintain their
'trade secret' process that they were willing to attribute the effect to
the (then) recently-released Digitech Talker vocoder pedal. As most
people are now all-too familiar with the 'Cher effect', as it became
known, we have maintained the article in its original form as an
interesting historical footnote."


Oops!


I had an Antares autotune unit a while back and when I set the
correction rate too fast, I did get an effect very similar to that on
Believe. However, the SOS article claimed something different, so I
went with that - then they said the interviewees were lying to protect a
trade secret...

We seem to be going round in circles on this one...

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Chris Whealy]

Gareth Magennis wrote:
This is funny: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYIMmi7JtHc

Gareth.


Whoever the moron was that set the autotune up for that one, ought to
loose their job...

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Chris Whealy]

Gareth Magennis wrote:
Here's something quite impressive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFCjv4_jqAY

Gareth.


I use Melodyne Studio alot, and I have to say its been my
get-out-of-jail-free card on more than one occasion! I've used it not
only to tidy up live performances of multi part vocal tracks, but I've
also been able to completely reharmonize chords that I thought sounded
weak. Its a superb product because it analyses the sound from a musical
point of view.

Like any tuning product, it has its limitations; but the borders imposed
by these limitations are so wide that you can not only transparently
correct a wonky pitch, you can even completely reshape a sound and
reharmonize a chord.

The demo for Melodyne DNA uses an acoustics guitar, however to see how
DNA would handle say, two singers sharing a mic and one of them is
slightly off pitch. I'm not knocking what DNA can achieve at all - it
will be an unbelievable tool when its released - its just that my
biggest use for Melodyne is on vocal tracks.

Chris W

PS - I didn't know Grizzly Adams could write such amazing software!

Nichts für ungut, Peter!

:-)

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

Chris Whealy wrote:
Joe Kotroczo wrote:
On 26/06/08 21:38, in article ,
"philicorda" wrote:

(...)

There is an interesting addendum to the 1999 Sound on Sound interview
with the producer of the track:

"In February 1999, when this Sound On Sound article was published, the
producers of this recording were apparently so keen to maintain their
'trade secret' process that they were willing to attribute the effect to
the (then) recently-released Digitech Talker vocoder pedal. As most
people are now all-too familiar with the 'Cher effect', as it became
known, we have maintained the article in its original form as an
interesting historical footnote."


Oops!


I had an Antares autotune unit a while back and when I set the
correction rate too fast, I did get an effect very similar to that on
Believe. However, the SOS article claimed something different, so I
went with that - then they said the interviewees were lying to protect a
trade secret...

We seem to be going round in circles on this one...

Chris W

How are we going round in circles? It's Autotune. Period. Maybe when you
do it in automatic mode it doesn't sound exactly like the Cher effect,
but send it MIDI notes and turn the correction time down and viola!
Exactly the right effect :-)

[Chris Whealy]

Gareth Magennis wrote:
Here's something quite impressive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFCjv4_jqAY

Gareth.


I use Melodyne Studio alot, and I have to say its been my
get-out-of-jail-free card on more than one occasion! I've used it not
only to tidy up live performances of multi part vocal tracks, but I've
also been able to completely reharmonize chords that I thought sounded
weak. Its an excellent product because it analyses the sound from a
musical point of view.

Like any tuning product, it has its limitations; but the borders imposed
by these limitations are sufficiently wide that you can not only
transparently correct a wonky pitch, you can reharmonize a chord and
even completely redesign a vocal sound.

The demo for Melodyne DNA uses an acoustic guitar, however I would like
to see how it handles say, two singers sharing a mic and one of them is
slightly off pitch. I'm not knocking what DNA can achieve at all - it
will be an unbelievable tool when its released - its just that my
biggest use for Melodyne is on vocal tracks.

Chris W

PS - I didn't know Grizzly Adams could write such amazing software!

Nichts für ungut, Peter!

:-)

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Arny Krueger]

"Chris Whealy" wrote in message


I had an Antares autotune unit a while back and when I
set the correction rate too fast, I did get an effect
very similar to that on Believe. However, the SOS
article claimed something different, so I went with that
- then they said the interviewees were lying to protect a
trade secret...
We seem to be going round in circles on this one...

Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?

[Romeo Rondeau[_4_]]

Chris Whealy wrote:
Gareth Magennis wrote:
Here's something quite impressive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jFCjv4_jqAY

Gareth.

I use Melodyne Studio alot, and I have to say its been my
get-out-of-jail-free card on more than one occasion! I've used it not
only to tidy up live performances of multi part vocal tracks, but I've
also been able to completely reharmonize chords that I thought sounded
weak. Its an excellent product because it analyses the sound from a
musical point of view.

Like any tuning product, it has its limitations; but the borders imposed
by these limitations are sufficiently wide that you can not only
transparently correct a wonky pitch, you can reharmonize a chord and
even completely redesign a vocal sound.

The demo for Melodyne DNA uses an acoustic guitar, however I would like
to see how it handles say, two singers sharing a mic and one of them is
slightly off pitch. I'm not knocking what DNA can achieve at all - it
will be an unbelievable tool when its released - its just that my
biggest use for Melodyne is on vocal tracks.

Chris W

PS - I didn't know Grizzly Adams could write such amazing software!

Nichts für ungut, Peter!

:-)


I love Melodyne :-) I haven't used the new version, but I plan to
upgrade. I use the plugin version. It a great tool, I can even use it to
plan out complex harmonies that otherwise wouldn't get dome because of
time constraints. I've even used it to correct more than a few
raspberries that would've had to be sung over again for sure. Blows
Autotune out of the water in a big way.

[Mike Rivers]

Romeo Rondeau wrote:

At her age, he should be tapping on her chest to make sure she's still
alive :-)

That would probably work just as well, and provide a similar effect.
Good idea. Let's make a record!

--
If you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring and reach
me he
double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo -- I'm really Mike Rivers
)

[Scott Dorsey]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Chris Whealy" wrote in message

I had an Antares autotune unit a while back and when I
set the correction rate too fast, I did get an effect
very similar to that on Believe. However, the SOS
article claimed something different, so I went with that
- then they said the interviewees were lying to protect a
trade secret...
We seem to be going round in circles on this one...

Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?

No more scooping! No more melisma! Maybe there IS a good point to it...
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Don Pearce]

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Chris Whealy" wrote in message

I had an Antares autotune unit a while back and when I
set the correction rate too fast, I did get an effect
very similar to that on Believe. However, the SOS
article claimed something different, so I went with that
- then they said the interviewees were lying to protect a
trade secret...
We seem to be going round in circles on this one...
Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?

No more scooping! No more melisma! Maybe there IS a good point to it...
--scott

Do you suppose that would work on Mariah Carey? - more like malisma than
melisma from her.

d

[David Morgan \(MAMS\)]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message...

Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?

They'd fire me instantly for the offense. (But we've been
here before... I'm lucky enough to work with paid pros at
church).

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article aq89k.5$K%2.0@trnddc02,
"David Morgan \(MAMS\)" /Odm wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message...

Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?

They'd fire me instantly for the offense.

Thank God! ;-)

[Richard Corfield[_3_]]

On 2008-06-27, Jenn wrote:
In article aq89k.5$K%2.0@trnddc02,
"David Morgan \(MAMS\)" /Odm wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message...

Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?

They'd fire me instantly for the offense.

Thank God! ;-)

If we're talking choirs or soloists, then round here even amplification
is sacrilege. Makes recording them harder too as to be seen with a
microphone!

- Richard

--
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ Richard dot Corfield at gmail dot com
_/ _/ _/ _/
_/_/ _/ _/ Time is a one way street,
_/ _/ _/_/ _/_/_/ except in the Twilight Zone

[Jenn[_2_]]

In article
. littondale.dyndns.org
,
Richard Corfield wrote:

On 2008-06-27, Jenn wrote:
In article aq89k.5$K%2.0@trnddc02,
"David Morgan \(MAMS\)" /Odm wrote:

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message...

Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?

They'd fire me instantly for the offense.

Thank God! ;-)

If we're talking choirs or soloists, then round here even amplification
is sacrilege.

I would hope that it would depend on the literature and the space. With
a decent space, I would hope for no amplification for, say, a Bach
motet. For yet another chorus of "Like a Deer", what the heck...the
more amplification the better! ;-)

[Chris Whealy]

Arny Krueger wrote:
"Chris Whealy" wrote in message



I had an Antares autotune unit a while back and when I
set the correction rate too fast, I did get an effect
very similar to that on Believe. However, the SOS
article claimed something different, so I went with that
- then they said the interviewees were lying to protect a
trade secret...
We seem to be going round in circles on this one...


Do you use, or have you tried an Autotune at church?



Yes. I used to use an Antares unit in post production, but now I use
Melodyne Studio.

Using an autotune live is something I've never wanted to do. Live
performances (at least in my experience) are too unpredictable.

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---

[Chris Whealy]

Romeo Rondeau wrote:
I've even used it to correct more than a few raspberries that would've
had to be sung over again for sure. Blows Autotune out of the water in
a big way.
Tell me all about it!

:-)

Chris W

--
The voice of ignorance speaks loud and long,
But the words of the wise are quiet and few.
---