News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Mathematical Genius of Auto-Tune by marzipan on Monday October 16, 2017 @06:03PM (#15487005)
Here is Billy Joel using Auto-Tune live in 2007, with overly aggressive settings:

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmhTmKD6rXc

Same man, same song, in 1978, 1986, and 2000:

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcLV6gE6THg [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hwwu5vYSShY [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQkXdRKMB9c

And now in 2015:

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovGwkScJRZ4

Now, while it's possible that he simply became a better singer between 2007 and 2015, subtler auto-tuning of the type conventionally used in pop production generally just makes the voice sound cleaner, thicker, more polished. Note that his style has also changed to favor staccato phrasing so as to limit stairstepping artifacts.

Re:The Mathematical Genius of Auto-Tune by tarsinge on Tuesday October 17, 2017 @09:42AM (#15490786)
> makes the voice sound cleaner, thicker, more polished

I think here you may be confusing Auto-tune with "modern" voice processing, which while happened together are quite different. Modern pop singers are overdubbed ridiculously with added distorsion, resulting in a "massive" (and slightly "robotic") lead voice.

Edit: You can clearly hear this "saturation" in the song Hello by Adele (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQHsXMglC9A), especially in the chorus. Compare with her natural voice: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yL7VP4-kP4

Re:The Mathematical Genius of Auto-Tune by DonHopkins on Monday October 16, 2017 @06:14PM (#15487086)
Let's all chip together and buy Meat Loaf a copy of Auto-Tune.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L-D6zj5U1g