Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Benmrx]

I'm just a bit curious here, how many of you are using programs like auto-tune, sound replacer, beat detective, etc. as a regular way of working and getting your sounds.

Maybe I'm just way behind the times here, but I've never once used auto-tune or  beat detective, used sound replacer maybe 3 or 4 times, only to send to a reverb for an effect.  

I assume most of the big, fancy records are using these, but after reading a few posts I fear these work ethics have begun to infiltrate the indie world.

[Fibes]

Benmrx wrote on Tue, 26 July 2005 03:54

I assume most of the big, fancy records are using these, but after reading a few posts I fear these work ethics have begun to infiltrate the indie world.

I use them. If a performance is brilliant and has a minor flaw or two i'll fix it. I tracked a song where the band came in after the breakdown and the snare head popped, perfect time for Apptrigga. I used a set of samples pulled from the beginning of the song and you'd be none the wiser. Auto tune was used on a song where the Moog drifted a little bit (because they do) from one octave to the next.

The key is never to go in thinking that you can rely on these crutches but remembering they are there when you've screwed the pooch and the budget calls for some quick ass covering.

[j.hall]

i don't use these tools as i'm last in line to work on a record in multi track form.

i get many records to mix that have been sound replaced, beat dectived, and auto tuned......and i'm working 99.9% with indie rock artists.

you have to ride a thin line between abusing a tool, and actually using it to make your life easier, and improve the product.

auto tune is no different then tuning a vocal yourself with a pitch shifter a line at a time.....it just works MUCH quicker and saves the AE days......

beat dectective and sound replacer are the same....it's no different then editing drums based on a click track, or trigering samples....it's just easier.

to me, it's the difference between framing a house with a hammer, or a nail gun

[craig boychuk]

Definitely just to fix.

I'm one of those no "click track ever" kind of people, who thinks that if you're good enough to play with a click then you don't need it.

That, and the whole "sucks the life outta everything" complaint.

If it comes to a point where there are extreme edits, then it should be played again when everyone knows what they're doing.



I have used autotune once, and I felt dirty.

But, the track was better for it.

[craig boychuk]

Fibes said:

The key is never to go in thinking that you can rely on these crutches

Words to live by.

--

[wwittman]

other 'crutches' that have (horrors) started to insinuate themselves into even (gasP) "indie" records:

overdubbing
comping multi-track recording
multiple mics on drums

seriously... unless you actually believe that all bands should show up, play into one mic for the duration of their 3 minute song, and then leave with the record... then it's ALL either a crutch or a useful tool

I do less auto-tune and beat detective and sound replacer on "mainstream" major label records that I work on than I hear on most "indie" records... in part because the major label artistes don't all think they are recording engineers as well.

I can't remember the last time I recorded a rock band in which at LEAST one member didn't think he knew how some technique was CRUCIAL to the sound because he read that The 4 Wednesday Tattoos (or whatever band they love this week) used it on their awesome record.

[TheViking]

The engineer that shares my space with me and I had this amazing conversation recently about popular 'scene' music in general.   The conclusion we came to is that it's the 80's again.   Bigger, louder and over-the-top is the goal.   Just listen to where mastering has taken our mixes.

It infects the bands we work with.   They want all the sounds seperated - back in the 80's it was triggers or seperate tracking of each sound of the drum kit - now we have sound replacer and apptrigga.   They want their drums quantized so that they can compete with their peers.   It's more about image and the appearence.   They heard that new Post Hardcore Emo Screamo Indie band they all want to sound exactly like used sound replacer and beat detective so they want it too.

What's worse than all of the recording biz stuff is that when you go to a show nowadays, kids are all sporting their $1500 custom shop guitar and obnoxious quintuple rectal-fire amps that their mommy's and daddy's bought them so they could look the part.   They wear the tight-ass womans jeans and studded belts and are more fashion-core than any glam band tried to be back then.   It's the 80's - they are back with attitude.

I am praying for the day when some band emerges from the underground with something to actually say.   Or better yet, I want a band busting shit up on stage again.   It needs to stop being about the gear and the show and the look and it needs to start being about the music and the importance of making sure everyone in the room knows exactly how that guy on stage is feeling about the song he is singing.   I know there are bands out there doing that - it just doesn't seem to be the trendy scene kids that we end up having to record.

Ugh...   to think some of us were pissed off about the grunge movement.

The Viking
www.vikingrecording.com

[Benmrx]

Well I guess I am just behind the times here.  Our studio has carved its little niche in the scene because we're the only affordable place in town with a 2" tape machine.  I still mix in pro tools, so I can automate levels and sends to outboard gear.......although the last full length record I did, the band was very strict about keeping it all analog.  Tracked to 2", mixed and mastered to 1/4", and will only be on vinyl (with a CDR inside).  

Maybe it's just the scene here (seattle), but most of the indie rock bands here aren't too hip to the "fix-it" tools.  

I was mainly curious because I'm starting to think that some of my favorite records have used these tools.  I guess I never realized that using beat detective was just as common as multi-micing a drumset.

Maybe I'm wrong, but a record that I think sounds amazing that didn't use any of these tools is the Arkade Fire.  I read a post on here a while back where someone thought this record had a "lo-fi" sound to it.......I didn't think so at all.  My theory is that most peoples ears have become trained to perfect timing, pitch, etc.

" seriously... unless you actually believe that all bands should show up, play into one mic for the duration of their 3 minute song, and then leave with the record... then it's ALL either a crutch or a useful tool"

I don't think that at all.  To me there is a huge difference between using different mics for different instruments (i.e. - kick, snare, etc.) and using a program to calculate the math to put each and every hit on grid.  

[John Ivan]

TheViking wrote on Tue, 26 July 2005 17:05

The engineer that shares my space with me and I had this amazing conversation recently about popular 'scene' music in general.   The conclusion we came to is that it's the 80's again.   Bigger, louder and over-the-top is the goal.   Just listen to where mastering has taken our mixes. It infects the bands we work with.   They want all the sounds seperated - back in the 80's it was triggers or seperate tracking of each sound of the drum kit - now we have sound replacer and apptrigga.   They want their drums quantized so that they can compete with their peers.   It's more about image and the appearence.   They heard that new Post Hardcore Emo Screamo Indie band they all want to sound exactly like used sound replacer and beat detective so they want it too. What's worse than all of the recording biz stuff is that when you go to a show nowadays, kids are all sporting their $1500 custom shop guitar and obnoxious quintuple rectal-fire amps that their mommy's and daddy's bought them so they could look the part.   They wear the tight-ass womans jeans and studded belts and are more fashion-core than any glam band tried to be back then.   It's the 80's - they are back with attitude. I am praying for the day when some band emerges from the underground with something to actually say.   Or better yet, I want a band busting shit up on stage again.   It needs to stop being about the gear and the show and the look and it needs to start being about the music and the importance of making sure everyone in the room knows exactly how that guy on stage is feeling about the song he is singing.   I know there are bands out there doing that - it just doesn't seem to be the trendy scene kids that we end up having to record. Ugh...   to think some of us were pissed off about the grunge movement. The Viking www.vikingrecording.com

As a writer and player ,I can really relate to all this. As an engineer, I just don't record that stuff. I'm thinking I might start to focus on Blues and jazz from an engineering standpoint., Even in the "jazz" world ,the problems seem to be reflecting the times. After all, there is this stuff they call "smooth Jazz" A lot of this music amounts to Ideas that great R&B bands from the old days said no to.

Thankfully, I can sit and make the music I want to make. There are some really fun things coming.

As for using Auto tune or sound replacer go's,, I've used auto tune on other peoples stuff but never will on mine. I can see grabbing a snare hit that I missed on something that needs to go out fast for an ad or something but, on my stuff, everything will be played.

I've had people say mean things to me about all this,, it's funny. I never thought in a million years that I would have to be arguing the point that folks should PLAY their instruments through the whole tune without mistakes. People simply will not get any better at playing if they don't.

Strange stuff.

Ivan..............

[Benmrx]

"I never thought in a million years that I would have to be arguing the point that folks should PLAY their instruments"

That's insane.  And this whole ghost tracking idea?  It's one thing to find the best drummer you possibly can for say......bruce springstein, but a 20 something 3-5 piece band?  What's the point?  Why not just let the producer form the band based around the singer.........or is that what's going on already?  

[7minAbs]

I do not normally contribute to this forum but wanted to chime in.

Many bands are put together by the producer/label and are centered around the singer. When you read a bio about a young band, there is usually alot to the story missing. I played for a band that evenutally signed to a major. Although I was a founding member of the band, I was left out of the bio completely (as well as the other two guitarists). A friend of mine at capitol later showed me a sampler that had a song from this band that I demo'ed...my guitar tracks...and had the new guitarist listed as the guitar player.
Lastly, there was a running joke about how the manager once stated that the singer was the "pizza" and the rest of the band was the "pepperoni".

It's no wonder things sound so homogenized these days. The days of bands playing together and getting a chemistry seem to be gone.

Hopefully I have not digressed too much from the original topic but if so, I will comment on the use of autotune, B.D., etc. in today's music. It seems to me that people have acquired a tasted for "sterile" sounds (ie guitars, drums, bass PTooled to death). It is the expectation. I hear so many AE/Producers talk about "when players played in time" etc. SOME of the people making these comments wouldn't know a good take if it hit them in the head.  They are more influenced by what is happening than they think. Most are just responding to the expectations of the label so that they can feed their families.  IMO striving for the human element has been long gone.  There's a sound and it is like a soccer ball in a kids soccer ball game....no passing, EVERYONE follows the ball....

As far as the comparison to now being like the 80s...I agree with that but it's a little different as well. There were great players in the 80s, in some ways innovative. Yes, you can draw a comparison because there was a heavy emphasis on image. The difference is you couldn't buy 80s rock styles at the Gap. No matter how big it got, it was stil somewhat separate...a rebellion from the mainstream (ie "get a haircut!"). Even the "heart throb" singers had a quirkiness about them. Now its all about being GQ wannabe and then going to the mall and getting your studded belt. Hopefully I am making my point clearly...

Things are so formula right now, something's got to break, it always does.

Well, thanks for reading...interesting post.

[TheViking]

Agreed...   musicians in the 80's definately could actually play.   Although I have heard the stories of certain known rock drummers back then that usually had more tape on the floor after edits than there was left on the tape.   So, I guess as J said - same idea, different tools and quicker.

Also agree that fashion today is much more 'mall based' - i.e. Hot Topic, Gap, PacSun, Etc.   I guess my opinion is more in the larger than life, bigger, faster, better, more approach being just blown out.   There is an unatural feel to everything these days because it's all digitized and processed through these 'boxes' and 'plug ins'.   But unfortunately, a lot of us are left with the task of giving the clients what they want.

I also wonder what the next rebellion or movement in music is going to be.   What's the next big shift?   I'd like to believe that the indie rocker purists will have their way with this industry.   Dear God...   don't bring back disco.

The Viking
www.vikingrecording.com

[wwittman]

One thing that I think is emblematically different is that back then there was a widespread distrust of commercialism.
I don't mean people didn't want to sell records. They did and they do now.

I mean that MOST artistes, at least, didn't feel that selling their music was the same ting as selling clothes and electronics and hair products and whatever else.

I worked with a few new artistes who, just after their first albums went platinum were asked to do Rolling Stone fashion spreads and declined.
They felt that selling shoes one day could only make their audience question the seriousness of anyting they had to say the next day.

THAT is entirely different now.
Music artistes have successfuly been turned into a commodity.
And to a large degree this is a Gen X attitude... this feeling that there's no DIFFERENCE between programming and commercials.
And you can argue that this has become true.. but it was enabled by an ACCEPTANCE of it when ti started to creep in.

Some people complained about it and some said "oh, so what? it's all commercial anyway..."

I think there are still real bands and real writers and real artistes... but they are lost in the deluge of pure packaging and product placement crap.

And THAT has very little to do with auto-tune or editing or ProTools or anything else related to how it SOUNDS.
It has to do with what we come to expect our artistes to be.

[j.hall]

wwittman wrote on Wed, 27 July 2005 08:00

And THAT has very little to do with auto-tune or editing or ProTools or anything else related to how it SOUNDS. It has to do with what we come to expect our artistes to be.

BINGO!!!!!!!!!!

i think william's perspective is a little more formed then most all of ours that frequent this forum.  he has in fact, lived it.

i also agree with viking......i long for a band that plays great music that has some thing different, or dare i say original, about it....and puts on a rock show......

show me how you feel about your music....otherwise, i'll just put the CD in and stay home.

[7minAbs]

Quote:

i think william's perspective is a little more formed then most all of ours that frequent this forum. he has in fact, lived it.

Indeed. He has contributed to the sound track of my life.