# Autotune in Musical Theatre



## metti (Nov 7, 2010)

I am currently in production meetings for a show I am sound designing/engineering this Spring and the director and musical director have asked me if it would be possible to use Autotune live to help out two of the secondary principles who are sometimes having trouble staying completely on pitch. Personally, I think this is ridiculous but that is sort of besides the point. I think I can do this by routing an insert on their body mic channels (Countryman B3 via Sennheiser 500g2) into a computer running Autotune under a VST host program and then back in to the mixer (DM1000v2) but does anyone know if it will be able to do a decent job live? I haven't ever used Autotune before but I recall seeing in a presentation on it that you need to give it the key for each song to get good results. I would imagine that I could automate this via MIDI from the DM1000 to be recalled in conjunction with each scene but I could be off on this. Anyway, my basic questions are: 1) Will it sound alright? 2) Are there technical hurdles that I haven't thought of that I should be prepared for? and 3) Has anyone ever done this and, if so, do you have any advice/thoughts?


----------



## metti (Nov 7, 2010)

Also, would there be a major advantage to using a dedicate piece of outboard hardware. If so, which would be best? We could probably afford to spend about $1k total so we would need to be looking for units that come in around $500 each. From what I can see, that includes the Antares AVP, TC Helicon VoiceWorks or TC Helicon VoiceWorksPlus. Thoughts?


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 8, 2010)

I think you will find that there is too much delay if you try to use a computer/plugin
I have use the Antares for live. To get the best result you need to make sure you have it set for the Key of the song etc. Also make sure that you do NOT SEND THE CORRECTED AUDIO BACK TO THE SINGER, that causes all sorts of problems with the singer attempting to correct etc.
Here is a link for a lively discussion on this

Autotune in live performance - Gearslutz.com

Sharyn


----------



## museav (Nov 8, 2010)

I agree that latency could be an issue. You might even want to split the related mic signal to two inputs so you have separate natural and pitch corrected signals to route.

The use of autotune and identifying its use to patrons and ticket purchasers should probably be a separate discussion, however you might want to consider such issues and the reaction of the audience if/when they realize it is being used.


----------



## Stookeybrd (Nov 8, 2010)

Latency will definitely be a problem. Using a computer which will also have AD DA conversions too, may create a delay so severe that it is unusable. Even the dedicated hardware option will have a few milli seconds delay.

Also consider the quantity/quality of the pitch correction. If these singers slightly slip off pitch for a moment, I believe very few people will notice that you have them tune'd. However, if they can not hit that high note during the button of the song, the correction may become apparent to many people. Rent one first and make sure that the director and MD understand what they are asking for.

Let us know how it goes, I'm interested to see how Auto-Tune performs in musical theater.


----------



## metti (Nov 8, 2010)

Would using one of the various dedicated hardware options help to limit the issues of latency? I know not to send the corrected version back to the vocalist and they don't get any of themselves back in the monitor anyway, only the orchestra. I like the idea of doing a wet/dry channels. As far as PR issues are concerned, I will do my best not to make it apparent and I will let the director/producers who asked for this to be done handle the press. I would assume that they are going to go with a "what they don't know won't hurt them" sort of perspective. I suspect they won't even tell the actors although I'm not sure about their plans in that regard.


----------



## banjokeith (Nov 8, 2010)

museav said:


> The use of autotune and identifying its use to patrons and ticket purchasers should probably be a separate discussion, however you might want to consider such issues and the reaction of the audience if/when they realize it is being used.


 
So when I fly a person for a show, do I need to alert the audience that the person is being flown with the assistance of cables, and is not actually able to fly on their own?


----------



## avkid (Nov 8, 2010)

People don't boycott shows because of artificial flying.
They do however boycott shows (and artists) over auto tune use.


----------



## MNicolai (Nov 8, 2010)

banjokeith said:


> So when I fly a person for a show, do I need to alert the audience that the person is being flown with the assistance of cables, and is not actually able to fly on their own?


 
We, the audience, have no expectation they can fly on their own. We do have an expectation they're capable of singing, especially if casting was done properly.


----------



## metti (Nov 8, 2010)

Look, I think that this thread is drifting away from my original intention. This was not meant to turn into a debate about the relative merits of autotune. I personally feel that they should think about stuff like talent during the casting process and, as such, this wouldn't be an issue. That said, I am not in a position to decide who tells what to whom and, quite frankly, it isn't really my problem. While I CAN argue to the rest of the creative team that this isn't technically possible or that it will sound so bad that it would be better to deal with their mediocre singing, I CANNOT argue that this is an ethical or PR issue. I don't feel like this is a battle I want to have at this point. If someone tells me that this is going to sound bad than that is one thing but the theatre's relationship with the audience is sort of above my pay grade. I am quite sure that those in charge are fully aware of the decisions they are making and potential repercussions.


----------



## Grog12 (Nov 8, 2010)

metti said:


> I CANNOT argue that this is an ethical or PR issue. I don't feel like this is a battle I want to have at this point. If someone tells me that this is going to sound bad than that is one thing but the theatre's relationship with the audience is sort of above my pay grade. I am quite sure that those in charge are fully aware of the decisions they are making and potential repercussions.


 
Wrong, you *willnot*argue that this is an ethical or PR issue. But I'll be honest as a designer you can and you should. If there were negative fallout from this it would be on your head as the person who spec'd the autotune machine and then ran it. It is your job to let the director and everyone else on the creative team know all the pro's and con's of a given situation without biased. 

From a technical standpoint, as has been mentioned, there will be delay/latency. Also you need to consider the size of the house. You can only autotune what gets into the microphone, and in a 200 seat house you're going to run into the issue of hearing whats coming from the singers mouth and whats coming from the mix.


----------



## Footer (Nov 8, 2010)

Grog12 said:


> Wrong, you *willnot*argue that this is an ethical or PR issue. But I'll be honest as a designer you can and you should. If there were negative fallout from this it would be on your head as the person who spec'd the autotune machine and then ran it. It is your job to let the director and everyone else on the creative team know all the pro's and con's of a given situation without biased.
> 
> From a technical standpoint, as has been mentioned, there will be delay/latency. Also you need to consider the size of the house. You can only autotune what gets into the microphone, and in a 200 seat house you're going to run into the issue of hearing whats coming from the singers mouth and whats coming from the mix.



Agree fully. Its your name that goes on the show and when/if it sounds like crap it is your name that is going to take the blame. Brittany, Justin, and just about every pop start out there have a rack of gear that goes everywhere they go with all their tunning and lip sync gear in it. Its not a cheap thing to do well. Better devices then what musicians friend and banjo center sell exist. Because you mentioned the DM1000, I have a feeling you don't want to spend more then your console on a good autotune system. That very well could be the case if you decide to go the cheaper route. 99% of autotune out there is designed for the recording studio, not live. If they can't hit the note, they can't hit the note. If this is a professional show, the can cast someone else and fire the person who can't sing. If this is in the world of education, which I think it is, deal with it. This is not the place to be teaching bad habits such as autotune, back tracks, and choke tracks. It gives a false sense of security to the talent and can really mess up their future, let alone what will happen to their ego *when* it gets out that they had to use autotune.


----------



## shiben (Nov 8, 2010)

Footer said:


> This is not the place to be teaching bad habits such as autotune, back tracks, and choke tracks. It gives a false sense of security to the talent and can really mess up their future, let alone what will happen to their ego *when* it gets out that they had to use autotune.



And it will get out. And people will talk. THe worst thing is that you will then be looking at auto-tuning every single poor singer that the director now knows that they can cast because you can fix it with technology. Will it work? Sure. It can be done live. Done well? Maybe. Should it be done? I think no in all situations, but its become accepted that major pop artists no longer need to be able to sing really well, just be able to dance and sing ok enough for the machine to fix it. Im thinking you might want to go ahead and bring it up to the director the ethical issues of doing this, not as a "your wrong for even thinking of this" but as a "here are the issues, did you realise your bringing up all these issues by doing this thing?'


----------



## metti (Nov 8, 2010)

You guys are right. It is my name on the sound design and it is my job to stop them from doing stupid stuff to a degree. As I said, I will definitely put the kibosh on this if it isn't going to sound good. Also, in all honesty it probably won't get out because the only people who would know would be the director, the MD, one of the producers, and myself and I don't think any of us would spill the beans. I do think they understand the potential for PR problems and I will certainly discuss those with them but I do feel like as a creative professional, my job is sort of limited to the actual performance and not what happens after to the theatre. On the other hand, I could potentially look bad for using this kind of gear, although I'm not sure it necessarily reflects poorly on an SD as much as it does on the people who needed it in the first place. Also, this is not educational theatre. I do work in schools sometimes and I would NEVER use Autotune in this context. Rather, this is a well established community theatre. All of the actors are unpaid and all of the creative team is paid and there are usually considerable budgets for the shows (except for sound, sigh...) Anyway, I am pretty conflicted on this issue and I am sort of leaning towards shooting it down but I figured I should at least explore the possibility. On a related note, someone mentioned to me on a different forum that perhaps giving the performers in question IEMs could help them to overcome their issues. I have never seen this done in theatre but I would welcome thoughts.


----------



## banjokeith (Nov 8, 2010)

I didn't mean to get a fight going here, but I just picture the silliness of walking into a theater and seeing an easel with a sign saying:

"Due to a lack of ability, coupled with the poor casting by our production team, tonight's performance will be utilizing Autotune"

I strongly agree that it will set a bad casting precedent if your directors now see this as a viable option, but to raise an ethical question just seems a bit extreme. In the end, you're delivering an entertainment product. This isn't journalism - we don't need to declare when something is a photo illustration - sometimes tricks are used, reality is tweaked a bit. Whether it's a soprano offstage hitting a high note for an onstage character, or a gadget upstairs bending a note a quarter of a step, the end result is providing a good show to the people paying to see one. Honestly, as an audience member I would much rather hear a good show that may have some minor trickery added than have my hearing assaulted by sour notes. The people have already been cast - assuming there is nothing you can do about that, you owe it to the audience not to give them crap.

And before it comes back at me, minor - in my opinion - doesn't cover lipsyncing...unless you are wearing a giant mascot head and scooting around on ice


----------



## MNicolai (Nov 8, 2010)

Unlike in a recording studio, in live audio the audio sources can only degrade after they've left the singers' mouths. From there, it's all downhill. If they're too far away from the mic, unable to project, or have a way that they're being mic'ed that isn't working for them, it's our jobs as sound people to do what we need to to resolve the situation. Even if it's a pristine signal coming out of the microphone, it can only degrade in quality as it passes through more processing devices, feet of cable, and so on.

If the problem is their fault, then we need to tell them, "Hey, there are a couple parts in this song that are coming across as a little weak. If you have some time, you should work on them and bring them up to the same level of quality as the rest of your performance." That's just as we would tell them, "If you want to be heard, you really need to practically put your lips on the microphone and speak up." 

We owe it to our performers to tell them the cold truth when we need to. It's our job to say, "There's this one area of the song where you're not quite in tune. We need to figure out a way to make this work. If you need to practice, practice. If you feel your struggling to hear your monitors, we can try turning them up to see if that helps. Let us work with you to make this performance excellent."

Comfort's overrated. I don't have the time or patience to baby cast members just like I wouldn't baby my crew members. If they're hitting my expectations, I tell them "Good Job!" and if they're falling short, I either need to reevaluate how realistic my expectations are or I need to walk up to them and say, "This is something I'd like you to work on. Your other stuff is alright, but this thing is something I know you can be better at." If you're honest with the cast, they'll respect you a lot more than if they find out you've secretly been judging their every move. More importantly, that you're willing to spend $1000 behind their backs on something like an autotune rig when you could be putting them through some extra voice lessons.


----------



## metti (Nov 8, 2010)

MNicolai, while that is all good and true in theory, I don't really think it is within my purview to be offering cast members notes. While I am in charge of my crew, and I am more than happy to tell them when they are doing something wrong, the director, MD, and SM are really responsible for the cast and I don't think it would go over well if I started going up to cast members and critiquing their performances. Also, the director and MD are already well aware of the cast members' issues and have been working with them to fix them. This is sort of a last resort besides recasting, which isn't going to happen. Regardless of the potential ethical issues, I think that this probably just isn't going to sound good due to the numerous factors in play in live sound such as the fact that we can't really fully isolate mics to pick up only their wearer. As I don't think this is going to produce favorable results, I'm probably going to veto this at our next production meeting.


----------



## pmolsonmus (Nov 8, 2010)

metti said:


> MNicolai, while that is all good and true in theory, I don't really think it is within my purview to be offering cast members notes .



I don't think its good in theory OR practice.

If a tech is giving technical advice - "watch it when you're turning your head we're losing you in the mic" - "Do you need more monitor" I can live with that.
HOWEVER,
If a tech, or SM or..... starts giving musical or theatre direction in my production, they will be looking for work elsewhere faster than than the out of tune singer. If the director isn't aware of the problem, then a new director is needed, if they can't fix the problem, then a new director or casting director or cast member is needed.

40 people telling someone they are out of tune with no training on how to fix the problem is the tech equivalent of a wanker or knob twiddler on the light/sound board only it can make the problem even worse for the performer. Stick to your expertise, direct your concerns to the director (if for some reason you don't think the director is aware of the problem). Otherwise, mind your business and do YOUR job, not mine.


----------



## bishopthomas (Nov 9, 2010)

I was amazed to see the number of replies in such a short period of time, but upon reading them saw that not a single one was helpful to the OP. Metti, I am in total agreement with your views on this, both technically and ethically. If the director wants to use Autotune on the ****ty singers then do your best to make it work. If it doesn't work then go from there. All you can do is educate the director of the TECHNICAL reasons why it would or wouldn't work and do your best. We are expected as technicians to "make magic happen," whether it's autotuning a vocal or eq'ing a bad sounding guitar amp. It doesn't reflect poorly on Ashley Simpson's FOH person for pressing play on a CD player, it is a reflection of the performer. It is your job to give the audience as good a sounding show as possible, and that includes using the necessary tools at your disposal. So, about those tools...

I think you'll have better results with dedicated outboard gear. Antares is "THE" Autotune, so check into their offerings first. I see that you have posted this question at PSW as well. I think you'll have better luck with a "real" answer there. No offense to the CB members, but there are far more professional audio people there. You can also try searching/posting at Gearslutz.com. This site is more for recording, but the Remote Possibilities forum is dedicated to live recording and also covers live sound as well. It is really the only forum on GS that I visit and has some great people in it.


----------



## museav (Nov 9, 2010)

bishopthomas said:


> I see that you have posted this question at PSW as well. I think you'll have better luck with a "real" answer there. No offense to the CB members, but there are far more professional audio people there. You can also try searching/posting at Gearslutz.com. This site is more for recording, but the Remote Possibilities forum is dedicated to live recording and also covers live sound as well. It is really the only forum on GS that I visit and has some great people in it.


You can get different perspectives from CB, PSW and GS and that can be valuable. That being said, all of these forums include both professionals and amateurs. Several of the responders here also participate in the other forums you noted, are they somehow less experts when they're here? A number of the people that have responded to this thread are indeed professionals in theatre and isn't that the application involved? Getting as much input as possible is good but I think you underestimate many of the people here.

Since you brought up the PSW thread maybe it would be helpful to comment on the responses there. The concerns regarding latency and the performer hearing the pitch corrected sound had also been noted here. So was that if the pitch is far enough off then autotune can improperly 'correct' it and that can lead to readily audible issues. And the suggestion to have split inputs for direct and autotuned. The only two additional issues raised in the PSW discussion seemed to be that some of the audience would likely be hearing a mix of the natural and reinforced 'autotuned' sound and that the 'autotuned' mics could potentially pick up other sounds and voices as well as having other mics picking up the poor singers. The general consensus there was also that autotune was probably not a great idea in theatre applications.

I don't think you can ignore the ethical aspect of using autotune, at least not in an application where the audience may be assuming everything is live. I personally believe that the use of autotune in live performances may be somewhat contextual. For example, the perspective on the use of autotune for a performance at an educational institution where the performers are acting students that are supposed to be learning their craft may differ from a professional production, which may also differ from a local community production.

I also think the responses here, and the differences with those expressed elsewhere, may reflect the varying roles of sound designers and technician/operators, between a focus on the concept versus a focus on the implementation. Many of the people expressing views on the concept of using autotune are likely doing so from the perspective of the sound designer role while the technical aspects of implementing it may be more representative of the perspective of an operator or A1. If Matthew is the Sound Designer then I believe there is some reason and even obligation to address the concept and not just the implementation.


----------



## Footer (Nov 9, 2010)

museav said:


> If Matthew is the Sound Designer then I believe there is some reason and even obligation to address the concept and not just the implementation.



Exactly. If he is a paid sound designer, he is paid to make sure the show that is presented on stage sounds good to the audience. It is his job to make sure that happens. It is also his job to talk to the rest of the creative team and the talent on stage about how to get everything out of the cast into the audience's ears. As a sound designer, I have given notes directly to talent. As an engineer I have given notes directly to talent. I don't tell them "Your out of tune", but I will tell them "That part does not sound right, is there something we can do to help you?". When mixing a band you have the same issues, and the same results. If the drummer is out of sync, maybe he needs more monitor so he can feel whats going on. 

Added to that, if this is all trying to be kept a secret, how do you explain to the talent that you missed a cue and your entire song was off an octave? 

This is a community theatre production. People do not expect the town's doctor to have perfect pipes. If they did, he would not be their doctor, he would be on Broadway. Some sacrifices have to be made and the audience will accept that. That is why community theatre tickets are 20-30 instead of 70-110. If your not paying for talent, you can not expect great talent.


----------



## metti (Nov 9, 2010)

As the sound designer, I do feel that it is my obligation to address whether or not this is a good idea and I have been pretty clear about that throughout this thread. While I do think that it is my job to insure that this idea will sound good before we proceed with it, I don't think it is my job to evaluate whether or not this is a good PR decision. That said, I am thinking that this probably isn't going to sound good and so I am going to tell the rest of the creative team that this is not an effective option.


----------



## jkowtko (Nov 9, 2010)

If you find an inexpensive solution for using Autotune with a PC that works for you, please share your findings.

While I would not use it on principal vocalists for reasons of integrity already stated above, I can see the benefits in using it on occasion for supporting and ensemble roles when the audience might be distracted otherwise.


----------



## MNicolai (Nov 9, 2010)

jkowtko said:


> If you find an inexpensive solution for using Autotune with a PC that works for you, please share your findings.



Same. Regardless of the ethics, I wouldn't mind hearing if anyone gets decent results with this more for my own curiosity than for practical purposes. I think if you decided to do this though you'd spend a lot of money and end up with something that doesn't have a polished enough result to achieve what you want to anyways. It'd be gear you've invested a lot of money into that you may never end up using again if it doesn't fit the bill.

I tossed the idea at the director and voice coach for the show I'm currently working on and both of them said they'd never consider using autotune. For $1000, you can put some people through a lot of one-on-one voice lessons and improve them professionally rather than jeopardize their career if word gets out they need autotune to make them sound semi-decent. Neither of them have any issues going to a cast member and politely but honestly critiquing their performance and following that up with advice and ideas on how to improve. The director and I agreed that neither of us minded last month when Tyne Daly took the stage here with a cold. She told us she had a cold and that her signing wouldn't be as spectacular as it normally is, but everyone was fine with that and we certainly would prefer a scratchy voice to a backing track.


----------



## bishopthomas (Nov 10, 2010)

museav said:


> You can get different perspectives from CB, PSW and GS and that can be valuable. That being said, all of these forums include both professionals and amateurs. Several of the responders here also participate in the other forums you noted, are they somehow less experts when they're here? A number of the people that have responded to this thread are indeed professionals in theatre and isn't that the application involved? Getting as much input as possible is good but I think you underestimate many of the people here.


 
I didn't mean to imply that there are not professional people here on CB. I only meant that the question posed would be more appropriately asked to a group of people who actually have experience with this type of use/hardware. I don't think anyone would argue that Control Booth is very theatre-based. My point was that there are far more people doing a variety of work at PSW and Gearslutz. Please don't take this as a slam on CB and my praising PSW. On the contrary, I am here on CB because I do not enjoy PSW. I find the people here far more personable and just in general "nicer." But other forums have their place, and that includes gaining information that has nothing to do with what this forum focuses on (theatre).


----------



## mixmaster (Nov 10, 2010)

WRT the tech aspects, never used autotune live, but our recording program got hold of some tracks to use in the studio classes that included an autotuned vocal track somehow. I don't the details but the delay on that track was noticeable, and supposedly a result of the signal passing though the autotune software engine. FWIW

As far as the ethical issues....we have a job to do and we have tools at our disposal to do that job. Obviously working with the performers to correct their pitch is the best issue, and I believe firmly in "garbage in garbage out" but, last night I put a compressor on a vocalist that had some trouble controlling her dynamics. Two nights ago I gated a tom mic to help control a weird overtone. Last week I had flute solo that benefited from a little EQ to warm up the sound a bit. Comps, gates, EQ and verbs, all tools of our trade. Was using any of these unethical? While the technology may make it cumbersome now, I fully expect autotune join them as regular and accepted part of the fx rack within a few years. Ultimately we are responsible to the audience to give them the best show possible. If that means a technological solution to a talent problem, in amateur theater, sometimes that's the way the cookie crumbles.


----------



## Grog12 (Nov 10, 2010)

mixmaster said:


> As far as the ethical issues....we have a job to do and we have tools at our disposal to do that job. Obviously working with the performers to correct their pitch is the best issue, and I believe firmly in "garbage in garbage out" but, last night I put a compressor on a vocalist that had some trouble controlling her dynamics. Two nights ago I gated a tom mic to help control a weird overtone. Last week I had flute solo that benefited from a little EQ to warm up the sound a bit. Comps, gates, EQ and verbs, all tools of our trade. Was using any of these unethical? While the technology may make it cumbersome now, I fully expect autotune join them as regular and accepted part of the fx rack within a few years. Ultimately we are responsible to the audience to give them the best show possible. If that means a technological solution to a talent problem, in amateur theater, sometimes that's the way the cookie crumbles.


 
With the excepetion of the compressor everything you've listed isn't to fix an issue with a singer/instrument but to a fix to the space and the equipment you have. A little warm up to a flute because the highs don't carry well in your system/space is much different than a singer who can't carry a pitch.


----------



## Les (Nov 10, 2010)

The following is merely my opinion, and all situations are purely hypothetical and a little low on the 'likely' scale. But it could happen...

I can only imagine what would happen if my local community theatre started using Autotune and the local paper found out.

"Denton Community Theatre Found To Be Using Backing Tracks".

Sure, that's not the actual situation, but with the exploitative nature of local news with nothing big to report on, this is most likely what would happen. Then, our season subscribers would start questioning every aspect of the theatre's productions.

"Are the singers really singing?"
"Do they really memorize their lines, or do they have ear buds now?"
"So what's next, a teleprompter??"

This would give patrons doubts about the production company's morals and goals, and they would begin to second guess everything they see or hear. Before long, they're not too easily amused because everything is 'fake'. Then you've got the performer who gets told "good job!" but knows deep down inside that they don't fully deserve the recognition.

I see community theatre as a semi-educational institution. Giving performers 'breaks' is hardly educational. 

I feel like community theatre patrons want a good show, but authenticity is more important to them. They go to be wowed by the talent, not the tech (unfortunately).

Reverb and EQ doesn't freak them out too much because most people don't know what it is. But the nature of Autotune really causes people to jump to conclusions. Look at what it did to Ashlee Simpson's career (not that she had one to begin with  ).


----------



## mixmaster (Nov 10, 2010)

Grog12 said:


> With the excepetion of the compressor everything you've listed isn't to fix an issue with a singer/instrument but to a fix to the space and the equipment you have. A little warm up to a flute because the highs don't carry well in your system/space is much different than a singer who can't carry a pitch.



But the idea that I'm using a tool to "fix" a problem and give my audience a better experience is the same regardless of what problem I'm "fixing". I wish all drummers could tune their drums, vocalist could control their dynamics, and flutes had more bottom end. I also wish some singers didn't drop off key occasionally. The fact remains that our world simply not that perfect and we occasionally need to help non-professional performers out a little to make a better show for everyone.


----------



## Footer (Nov 10, 2010)

mixmaster said:


> But the idea that I'm using a tool to "fix" a problem and give my audience a better experience is the same regardless of what problem I'm "fixing". I wish all drummers could tune their drums, vocalist could control their dynamics, and flutes had more bottom end. I also wish some singers didn't drop off key occasionally. The fact remains that our world simply not that perfect and we occasionally need to help non-professional performers out a little to make a better show for everyone.



If that is the case, fly in the movie screen and get the projectionist to come and and arc up the projectors. When you come to a show and pay 25 dollars or so for the ticket, see your neighbor from down the street playing the lead, you can't expect the same level of talent that happens on 42nd street. You present what you have authentically. If I use autotune/backing tracks/choke tracks to make every show perfect, might as well just watch a movie or just lipsync the entire thing. Its a live performance, not a performance that might be live or if it is live highly computer processed.


----------



## museav (Nov 11, 2010)

This has gotten a bit beyond the original question and into a more general discussion.

I had the very same thoughts in terms of when what delineates an acceptable use of technology in performance from an unacceptable use. Then I realized that in cases like this there is another aspect involved and that having to deal with something at the last minute or during a performance seems different than knowing in advance that you have a problem and other potential options. If the drums or piano are out of tune one night you deal with it the best you can but if you knew in advance that the drums or piano were out of tune, wouldn't you either get them tuned or find a replacement? Knowing that you have a problem and planning on a band-aid that may or may not work rather than addressing the root cause, just seems quite a bit different than dealing with problems that come during a performance.

Probably a bad analogy but it seems a bit like knowing in advance that you're going to have 60Hz hum in the system. You could plan to use the technology you have available and simply notch 60Hz out of everything and you might do that if the show starts in a few minutes. However, if it was possible to explore other options then wouldn't it make more sense to at least try to actually address the problem and avoid the potential negatives associated with notching everything?


----------



## mixmaster (Nov 11, 2010)

museav said:


> This has gotten a bit beyond the original question and into a more general discussion.
> 
> I had the very same thoughts in terms of when what delineates an acceptable use of technology in performance from an unacceptable use. Then I realized that in cases like this there is another aspect involved and that having to deal with something at the last minute or during a performance seems different than knowing in advance that you have a problem and other potential options. If the drums or piano are out of tune one night you deal with it the best you can but if you knew in advance that the drums or piano were out of tune, wouldn't you either get them tuned or find a replacement? Knowing that you have a problem and planning on a band-aid that may or may not work rather than addressing the root cause, just seems quite a bit different than dealing with problems that come during a performance.
> 
> Probably a bad analogy but it seems a bit like knowing in advance that you're going to have 60Hz hum in the system. You could plan to use the technology you have available and simply notch 60Hz out of everything and you might do that if the show starts in a few minutes. However, if it was possible to explore other options then wouldn't it make more sense to at least try to actually address the problem and avoid the potential negatives associated with notching everything?


 
I understand what you are saying, and I think my point of contention is a matter of degree. There is a bit of a difference between someone who flat out can't sing, and someone who slips a bit hitting certain notes. I understood that we are trying to help a performer who is struggling with a couple notes.
Certainly, I would agree that auto-tune isn't the right solution for someone who just can't carry pitch, ever, any more than using an eq to notch 60hz in your example. At that point you need to fix the problem at its source or get a new singer. 
HOWEVER, if you have a singer who is struggling with a bad note or two, it's much more like the drummer who's kit just has a weird overtone, or a piano that just has an unusual timbre. You can't always just make a drummer get new kit or bring in a different piano because the sound guy doesn't like the tone. 
In a perfect world we would alway be able to fix a problem at it's source. Occasionally just can't and when that happens, I'm of the opinion that the creative staff should be open to any technical solution, assuming that said solution can be implemented without ruining the over-all performance. 

Another aspect that I haven't seen come up is this: In this case, it seems like the director came to the OP looking for a tech solution, presumably after trying to work with the performer in question. In doing that, the director made the call that he is willing to sacrifices some of the "live-ness" of the show for the sake of accurate pitch on the part of all of his cast. In a very real sense, that takes any ethical issues out of the hands of the tech staff. 

Is this the same as lip syncing? Not unless you are auto-tuning a performer to death, in which case there's an issue bigger than a few missed notes. At least with an auto-tuned voice, there's a vocalist singing and creating the sounds. Lip syncing a performance is cheating and the prevalence of this in the techno-spectacle that we accept as live performance is why I don't buy tickets to any today's crop of boy- and girl- bands and hiphop stars. I guess for me it's a question of weather I'm supporting talent, or using tracks to cover up a complete and total lack of talent.


----------



## Grog12 (Nov 11, 2010)

mixmaster said:


> .
> HOWEVER, if you have a singer who is struggling with a bad note or two, it's much more like the drummer who's kit just has a weird overtone, or a piano that just has an unusual timbre. You can't always just make a drummer get new kit or bring in a different piano because the sound guy doesn't like the tone.
> .



Actually it's more like a piano player who always hits the wrong chord or a drummer hit hits the snare as opposed to the half hat and fixing it with a backing tack because you have no faith they'll ever be able to hit the right note.


----------



## SHARYNF (Nov 13, 2010)

I would go with Antares Autotune. I have used it quite a few times. It will give the vocals a detectable "quality" but it is used quite a bit on audio releases so it is not all that objectionable. The less the autotune has to correct the vocals obviously the better. I have used it with come Karaoke situations with mixed results. If the person is a bit flat or sharp then it corrects but if the vocal is closer to the "wrong" note then it tends to correct to the closest note, If you reset the unit for each key of each song that it makes less mistakes. 

Sharyn


----------



## museav (Nov 13, 2010)

SHARYNF said:


> I would go with Antares Autotune. I have used it quite a few times.


Sharyn, in what situations have you used it? The technical issues expressed seem to be:

Latency - Likely acceptable with a dedicated unit.

Monitoring - Providing an uncorrected monitor signal.

Error in tuning - If the sound is far enough off pitch then autotune could correct it in an undesired manner. So how off pitch are the performers?

Natural Sound - Some of the audience may hear the natural, uncorrected sound direct from the performers as well as the corrected sound from the house audio system. How much of the audience this may affect will vary by venue and by how loudly the performers sing.

Pickup of Only The Desired Performer - How do you avoid other sources being picked up by the microphones being autotuned and/or the off pitch vocalists being picked up by other mics?


How did you address these issues in your successful applications of autotune?


----------

