# Autotune: The Elephant in the Room



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Now that I've lured you in with a sensationalist title, how concerned should we be about the use of pitch-correcting software in opera recordings?

Firstly, anyone who thinks that Autotune (or its equivalent) is reserved for pop stars is kidding themselves. It's prevalent in opera as well. Arguably, the corrections are minimal but frequent just the same.

An engineer will argue that shrinking budgets and limited time for recording means fewer takes. Thus, pitch-correction can provide a short-cut solution to provide the listener with the best possible product. 

If it's a studio recording, we could argue that it doesn't matter. What's the difference between Autotune and just doing multiple takes until the singer gets it right? Neither is a fair reflection of a live performance.
If so, what is a live performance (aside from physically attending)? Viewing/listening to a dvd/cd? These are being Autotuned as well. The La Traviata dvd with Netrebko/Villazon (remember the one with the big clock on stage) is rumoured to have hundreds of pitch-corrections on it. It's not alone. 
Is it acceptable? We want a quality product and it's in the best interests of the opera company to provide it. However, does any correction to it make the recording a lie in a historical context. When we play a live dvd/cd, we assume that we are more or less hearing what the audience experienced. Not so.

Of course, pitch-correction isn't anything new. I know it was at least being used in the 60s but today it's an easier process. Classical musicians aren't off the hook either. Many a soloist is doing little corrections here and there as well.

Should we be concerned or simply embrace it's practicality


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Couac Addict said:


> An engineer will argue that shrinking budgets and limited time for recording means fewer takes. Thus, pitch-correction can provide a short-cut solution to provide the listener with the best possible product.
> 
> If it's a studio recording, we could argue that it doesn't matter. What's the difference between Autotune and just doing multiple takes until the singer gets it right?


 You've answered this just above. Time is tight, and the meter in the recording studio does not just run, it _hemorrhages_ expenses.

Too, the difference between what might be done in rehearsal, including skipping to MM 108 and continuing, is a lighter singing if repetitions of arias are anticipated. That vs. the recording studio, where every take is a full-force delivery, and you've got some of the best with the greatest of stamina flailing, at least a little bit.

So much goes right by the discerning ear in a live performance, especially when a drama and physical spectacle are there to pull focus away from 'the sound alone.'

I don't like the idea, but I would like to think (and hope) it would be used only in those more dire emergencies, as in days of yore when Goddard Lieberson asked Christa Ludwig to drop in for a high C that Elisabeth Schwarzkopf was unable to deliver after a very long day of recording.

And compared to the everyday event in pop music, placing the horns in one room with a mic, earphones on their head; other instrumentalists in another room, ditto the earphones and mic; the singer in yet another, all wired up either to a click track or a conductor all can see, recorded and then room ambiance synthesized, the whole olio 'mixed up or down,' well, a tiny titch of autotune is not really in any way going so 'pops' by comparison.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

They're not using autotune the way they often do in pop, though, where the performance is run through in its entirety from the beginning with the plugin running so that any mistakes will be corrected automatically. I've heard that they barely try to have the stars sing on pitch because it doesn't really matter.

Using small pitch corrections by hand is really no worse than the patches we all know they edit into recordings.

And unless they use mics, which most operas still don't (I think?) there's no way you can autotune live, as is done in pop concerts.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> They're not using autotune the way they often do in pop, though, where the performance is run through in its entirety from the beginning with the plugin running so that any mistakes will be corrected automatically. I've heard that they barely try to have the stars sing on pitch because it doesn't really matter.
> 
> Using small pitch corrections by hand is really no worse than the patches we all know they edit into recordings.
> 
> And unless they use mics, which most operas still don't (I think?) there's no way you can autotune live, as is done in pop concerts.


True. I wasn't suggesting that anyone in opera was going down the "Cher - I Believe" path. It is just pitch corrections. I was curious if a live recording holds the same respect among listeners if it has been corrected.

An issue I didn't bring up concerning pop music is how it might affect the audio quality once was you run the entire thing through Autotune. I'm not savvy enough about it to provide any informed comment but I suspect that it wouldn't be doing the audio any favours.


----------



## Tsaraslondon (Nov 7, 2013)

PetrB said:


> I don't like the idea, but I would like to think (and hope) it would be used only in those more dire emergencies, as in days of yore when Goddard Lieberson asked Christa Ludwig to drop in for a high C that Elisabeth Schwarzkopf was unable to deliver after a very long day of recording.


First I've ever heard of it. Which recording is this in? Walter Legge produced all of Schwarzkopf's recordings, as far as I know, right up to her final recital which was recorded for Decca (no top Cs required in that).

On the other hand it is well known that Schwarzkopf provided the top Cs for Flagstad on the Furtwangler *Tristan und Isolde*.


----------



## KRoad (Jun 1, 2012)

Having done rather a lot of studio recordings and never having resorted to an auto-tune programme myself - though "take 261" is not unknown - I think I would argue that perfection (whatever that is) is what I want from a Studio Recording. However, not if it is achieved through an auto-tune device. This can impart undesirable aural artefacts to the quality of the voice and/or instruments and besides, unlike take 261, the outcome isn't completely human but rather synthetically tainted.

In the case of opera, I listen in awe to the remarkable intonation of opera singers and like to convince myself that what I am hearing is the real article and not a voice that has been processed - and not just auto-tuned by the way - but alas it must remain an article of faith in the case of recorded opera these days. Perhaps we can never be really sure unless we are actually attending a live preformance.


----------



## Couac Addict (Oct 16, 2013)

KRoad said:


> I listen in awe to the remarkable intonation of opera singers and like to convince myself that what I am hearing is the real article and not a voice that has been processed - and not just auto-tuned by the way - but alas it must remain an article of faith in the case of recorded opera these days.


Our orchestra backs up the occasional high-profile singer and pitch-corrections are the norm everywhere (for studio work).


----------



## Radames (Feb 27, 2013)

Mahlerian said:


> And unless they use mics, which most operas still don't (I think?) there's no way you can autotune live, as is done in pop concerts.


I know a music critic who says he knows they mike at Montreal Opera. He says he got that right from one of the singers. I find it hard to detect though. The voices seem to be coming directly from the singers.


----------



## Don Fatale (Aug 31, 2009)

Couac Addict said:


> Our orchestra backs up the occasional high-profile singer and pitch-corrections are the norm everywhere (for studio work).


If that gives me, the buyer and listener, a more enjoyable recording then that's fair enough. We know that previous recordings used inserts (sometimes by different singers) and this is just a modern variant.

Expediency is one thing, conning the listener is something else.


----------



## arpeggio (Oct 4, 2012)

*Community Orchestras*

I wish we could use this with the string section of our community orchestra.


----------



## Seattleoperafan (Mar 24, 2013)

I would have welcomed auto tune at the opening of Benaroya Hall in Seattle when Jessye Norman attempted the Immolation Scene from The Ring too late in her career. She was flat and loud on ALL of the high notes. She would have been safer and more effective to have sung something by Erda.


----------



## Mahlerian (Nov 27, 2012)

Radames said:


> I know a music critic who says he knows they mike at Montreal Opera. He says he got that right from one of the singers. I find it hard to detect though. The voices seem to be coming directly from the singers.


Autotuning live is impossible as long as you can still hear the original source, as it would only affect what comes out of the speakers. With pop/rock concerts, you can't hear the singer without the mic, so it doesn't matter if their pitch is being corrected live, but opera singers, even amplified, will still be audible. The dissonance that results from a quarter tone clash would seem extremely obtrusive.


----------

