If I remember correctly, he said that that's his natural voice. No autotune or anything. But hey, I know what you mean about the sound. I was amazed when he said that!
Peace,
Adam.
I think you're confusing Adam Steen with Dave (Koolkikiland) from Crossed Hearts, Adam.
I'm pretty sure Adam confessed he does use Autotune (it certainly sounds like it), justifying it by saying that it otherwise takes far too long to record all those backing vocals perfectly in tune.
I think you accused Dave of using Autotune, but he confirmed he didn't, saying that he just naturally sang everything very straight.
Well I don't want to accuse anybody of correcting pitch of lead vocals, I just believe that the 4 chorus voices are based on some software. I only have a hardware thing for that - a Korg "ih", and it sounds very robot like, so it's of little use if you use it alone. But I think it works ok when used in the background with additional 3 or 4 "true" voices. I tried that at the end of this song: link
Unfortunately this doesn't sound like different humans or even different genders/ages, more like clones with soar throats. I think it's possible with some software to change the "gender" tone in the generated voices, and I wonder if anyone of you have experience with the quality of that.
marco
teleport8 wrote: I think it's possible with some software to change the "gender" tone in the generated voices, and I wonder if anyone of you have experience with the quality of that.
Marco,
I'm not familiar with any software that would change the tone of the vocalist from one gender to the other. Is it possible that you're confusing the settings in a program like Antares Autotune? I mean, Autotune has a settings on the key range panel where you can select gender specific ranges like soprano, alto, tenor, baritone and bass. . . but you have to match it to the singer - not the other way around.
BTw. . .and this isn't directed at anyone in particular. . just random opinions on autotune in general . . . but I have no problems using autotune on clients. I mean, if their singing is a little pitchy and they end up blaming me for a bad recording, which is usually the case because most clients are in dreamland. . you better believe I'm gonna whip out the autotune. Sometimes I'll even put it on the input signal as it's going to disk without even bothering to tell them. Although, if they can't hold a tune in a bucket, there's nothing and I mean no software that will help. . . except comping a vocal from several takes, taking the least crappiest of each phrase. . . but that is such a tedious pain in the $%#.
Ok, enough rambling. .
Koolkikiland!
Thanks for clearing this out. I'm very tired of this discussion. It seems to be the only input some people have when it comes down to discuss fan songs. Booring... :(
By the way, I like your version of "She Makes Me". I can hear it's made with great affection for what Brian May created back in -74 (I suppose it's mostly Brian).
For me this song is about when Brian is very ill, lying at hospital. Being treated by this nurse whom takes good care of him night and day. Hence the title "Stormtrooper in silettoes". A very serene love (greatfullness perhaps) from him to her. But that's just a nice way to think about it for me...
/Adam S
kweenqueen wrote:
Thanks for clearing this out. I'm very tired of this discussion. It seems to be the only input some people have when it comes down to discuss fan songs. Booring... :(
/Adam S
Yeah. . . It's not about competing with Queen in any way. OBVIOUSLY, no one can. The whole point of doing a fan song for me (and I'm sure you as well) is to pay tribute to the men, knowing full well that our versions will never be as good as the originals. The reason I get into the SOC covers is because it makes me realize how well (most of) Queen's songwriting holds up, even under sometimes serious abuse.
American Idol. . a perfect example. Even as I listened to the contestants make their feeble to hideous attempts, I really got a kick out of it realizing DANG! I can still hear the genious behind the songwriting. I mean, 3 (sometimes 4) of the world's greatest songwriters in one band? Phenomenal.
Since I'm always learning about recording and production, its also about studying Queen song arrangments and productions. When I do a cover I always hear and learn something new that I'd like to incorporate into my own recordings. Kind of like copying a DaVinci or a Renoir.
Anyway, thanks for the feedback. And your theory behind the Stormtrooper title. . . probably the best theory I've heard yet about what the heck that means. ;D
Dave
Koolkikiland wrote: Since I'm always learning about recording and production, its also about studying Queen song arrangments and productions. When I do a cover I always hear and learn something new that I'd like to incorporate into my own recordings. Kind of like copying a DaVinci or a Renoir.
It's exactly the same for me!! Can you have better teachers in studio recording than Queen anyway. Digging deep into the arrangements is probably the best way to find out how they actually "did things" back then. So for me it's very awarding as a musician. Off course it makes me happy if someone should like it as well...
/Adam Steen