Auto-tune was first invented more than a decade ago, but it didn’t become popular until around 2008. T-Pain and Kanye West were some of the first adherents to the effect, with Justin Vernon and fun. later jumping on board.
No, auto-tune’s horrible
Pop-rock trio fun. appeared as the musical guest on this week’s episode of Saturday Night Live, performing their recent hit “Some Nights” and further cementing my distaste for the hits accented or overloaded with auto-tune that have dominated the radio in recent history.
There are certainly two distinct uses of the pitch-correcting software popularized by R&B artist T-Pain but actually first used by Cher in her 1998 hit “Believe.” The former, the T-Pain-style usage, is as an actual pitch corrector, allowing those who cannot sing to sound like they’re in tune, but robotically so. The latter, the Cher kind, is as a stylistic tool, meant to be a creative touch to the song. I’d argue, except in rare cases, neither usage is very appealing.
The more irritating of the two uses is certainly a way to cover up a terrible voice. Ke$ha comes to mind as an artist who would be nothing without auto-tune making her irritatingly whiny speak-singing voice dance in tune around her small vocal range. Auto-tune propelled her to fame without any lyrical depth or singing talent — at least Lady Gaga, Katy Perry and even Britney Spears have the vocal chops. Surely there are others out there who deserve fame for the musical ability they possess without the aid of computers.
Furthermore, there is beauty in the natural variation of a good singing voice. Perfection is boring, and there is a human feeling to an imperfect vocal recording. Many musicians have been defined by imperfect vocals, using non-traditionally “good” vocals to create an aesthetic — folk-punk band Against Me!, indie rock band Modest Mouse and folk legend Bob Dylan are all great examples.
Auto-tune as a creative touch is harder to completely denounce. Sure, there are certainly times when it has been used and not been offensive, as in Kanye West’s “Love Lockdown,” where the juxtaposition between the tribal music and the automated vocals is interesting and subtle.
But these examples are few and far between, and as a general rule the program is a detractor and nothing more. In “Some Nights,” vocalist Nate Ruess could create a powerful moment if he belted that note at the end of the bridge, but the auto-tune the band used is a major distraction that kills the energy. It’s even worse when the band performs it live, as the auto-tune derails the song just as it’s reaching its peak.
I encourage all artists who are considering using auto-tune in their performance to reconsider. Nine times out of 10, the song sounds better when it is left as is, minor flaws and all. Let’s leave the robotic voices in the (dystopian) future.
–Kelsey
Yes, auto-tune has its merits
It’s all Kanye’s fault.
Obviously, auto-tune was around well before Mr. West went crazy with it on 808s and Heartbreak, but he elevated its cultural status. West unfortunately inspired plenty of imitators with no talent or singing ability to try and use auto-tune as a form of voice correction. In these instances, auto-tune is a huge failure and an embarrassment (see: Rebecca Black).
Sure, it made his voice sound better. But there is something else West did with auto-tune: He legitimized its use as a potential art form.
Critics lavished praise on West for the three-minute section in the album version of “Runaway” where West just mumbles and warbles away in auto-tune, singing without words or melody but instead with a distorted version of his voice. While I found this part slightly indulgent and silly at first, I do think those in favor of it have a point — West was experimenting with auto-tune as an instrument, just as a jumbled, discordant array of sounds in a Beatles song (“Revolution 9”) could be viewed as experimentation. And, in the full context of “Runaway,” the moment works, making the song more epic overall.
So, when it comes to auto-tune, it’s a power that must be used wisely. And it must not fall into the wrong hands. The misperception about auto-tune is it can make anybody sound like a good singer — it doesn’t (just watch West’s terrible Saturday Night Live performance of “Love Lockdown” to prove this). To sing well with auto-tune, you still need to hit the notes.
This is why it’s okay for good singers to use auto-tune. Justin Vernon, (better known as Bon Iver, has experimented plenty with the tool. He did it on “Woods,” where he layers his vocals on top of one another in a growing wall of sound. Upon hearing “Woods,” West recruited Vernon to help him with My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy — he’s the guy singing on “Monster” and “Lost in the World.”
Vernon is an incredible singer without auto-tune, and he doesn’t use it for most of his music. But he’s experimented with it as a way to make his voice sound unique and different — and in these cases, it works.
And breakout band fun. has certainly experimented with auto-tune on its latest album, Some Nights. The band’s lead singer, Nate Ruess, has an absolutely incredible voice — I’ve seen him perform live multiple times, before “We Are Young” took over the radio. On “Some Nights” and even more blatantly on the album’s last song, “Stars,” Ruess uses auto-tune midway through the song as a change of pace, to play around with his voice in a way he couldn’t otherwise.
The first time I heard this I was furious — why would Ruess use auto-tune if he doesn’t need it? While I’m still not in love with these auto-tuned excursions, I do kind of get it. For a good singer, auto-tune is a way to have some fun in the production studio and give the song a uniquely modern feel. When used the right way, the “evil,” “inauthentic” sounds of auto-tune can be — dare I say it — not that bad.
–Adam
