Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hlthe2b

(113,120 posts)
5. I am well aware they are not the same. I am making TWO points in one posting.
Thu Jan 29, 2026, 01:35 PM
Thursday

And, FORGETTING THE AUTOTUNE ISSUE FOR THE MOMENT, to the second point: I am speaking to the pulling of disparate digital recordings of instrumentals and tacking them together--whatever you want to call that today as opposed to actually recording the instrumentals at the same time or at least in the same studio later-- to combine & produce the final recording. Recording together does not mean they have to all be in the same room a la Beatles doing their "Get Back" or "Let it Be" documentary recordings. But, searching for some unknown playing a digital instrumental track and/or using AI to generate it and using it to back a singing track may be today's preferred way of doing so, but it certainly is not mine (nor Springsteen's fortunately).

But, back to point 1, I still hate Autotune and will not listen to the crap vocalists who use it. I am aware there are fare more technologically advanced alternatives to Autotune that are less obvious and obnoxious. But, those are the performers who have to be blasted out by backing recorded vocals or instrumentals in concert because they can't begin to sing anything comparable to the recording. It is telling. Today we have tons of singers who really cannot sing and for all the technology to "fix" that, it shows.

Recommendations

1 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Bruce Springsteen's new p...»Reply #5