Autotune: Musical Steroids?
Oxford Dictionary describes autotune as “a device or system for tuning a piece of music, etc., especially a computer program that lets you correct the sound of a singer’s voice or an instrument that is out of tune on a recording” (“Autotune”, Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary). Originally created for use in seismic data analysis (Jarvis, “Why autotune is bad”), this intriguing software has the ability to alter and enhance musical performances, both recorded and live. While it is no doubt that, when used correctly, autotune has the ability to fix slight mess ups to save enormous amounts of time and money, the psychological harm and malintent behind the use has shown to be a problem in the modern music industry. With great power comes great responsibility, and the development and use of autotune in today’s day and age poses many negative consequences for artists and music lovers alike.
From its use in hit song “Believe” by Cher in 1998, autotune has increasingly gained popularity in the music industry. Young artist, T-Pain, was inspired by the use of autotune in a Jennifer Lopez song and decided that this software would help him stand out. He said,“If I was going to sing, I didn’t want to sound like everybody else. Just wanted something to make me different. Auto-Tune was the one” (Fitzmaurice, “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History”). Following the release of T-Pain’s autotune album, several other artists in the rap music genre including Snoop Dogg, Lil Wayne, and Kanye West turned to autotune in an attempt to create their own “distinct sonic texture” (Fitzmaurice, “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History”). These releases made their way to the top of the Billboard Music Charts for many weeks. For other artists, such as Indie band Death Cab for Cutie, autotune was not as exciting, and they even went as far as to show their opposition by wearing blue ribbons to the Grammys (Fitzmaurice, “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History”). Lead singer and guitarist for Death Cab for Cutie, Ben Gibbard, stated in an interview with MTV News, “Over the last ten years, we’ve seen a lot of good musicians being affected by this newfound digital manipulation of the human voice, and we feel enough is enough” (Fitzmaurice, “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History”). Even the Times went as far as to list autotune as one of the “50 Worst Inventions” and claim it as “a technology that can make bad singers sound good and really bad singers … sound like robots” (Fitzmaurice, “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History”).
The question is then posed: Why would artists such as T-Pain and Kanye West have drastically different views of autotune than artists and people like Ben Gibbard and the Times?
The answer lies in the ethical implications of this software. Many music lovers and up and coming artists have turned to forums such as LinkedIn and Reddit and news media to share their views on the matter.
When talking about this grand technology, it should be first recognized that, in the right hands, autotune has the potential to save massive amounts of time and money. When put in a situation where a producer is paying for studio space by the minute and the artist records a great segment with a few mistakes, autotune could be used to fix those small mistakes without costing the producer more minutes in the studio. According to Musicrow, “ It blends off-key or flubbed notes to the nearest true semi-tone which produces the effect of perfect singing every time. This corrective effect is a lot harder to notice because when it’s used properly, it’s an inaudible process”(“Auto Tune: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly”). For many artists and music lovers who are wary of the use of autotune, they state that the use of the technology is too obvious. Musicrow explains, “a perfect take doesn’t do anything to autotune. It only acts on the bad notes. The further off they are, the more adjustment it has to make and so the more obvious it is” (“Auto Tune: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.”). When thinking about music producers, we can draw a parallel to content mediators. In this class, we read a piece called “Behind the Scenes: Content Moderation”. In the introduction, the writing states, “But the work they do, the conditions under which they do it, and for whose benefit are all largely imperceptible to the users of the platforms that pay for and rely upon this labor. In fact, this invisibility is by design” (Roberts, 3). Content mediators essentially monitor and control users’ interactions and what they can see. In a similar way, producers also dictate what listeners hear and can alter what we hear with this autotune tool. However, listeners are not aware of the process, and they do not have insight into the origins of the song. To draw the parallel, they are also invisible. If listeners only hear the enhanced version of a song, is autotune eliminating the need for real vocal talent?
Soloist, vocal instructor, and founder of Swallow-a-dragon Voice Studio, Ali Garrison, takes to LinkedIn to share her views on autotune from the perspective of a singer. In her post, Ali states, “[I]n terms of altering (“improving”) a singer’s performance, it then becomes like using performance enhancers in the olympics or airbrushing human models in advertising images. It has grave, and insidious socio-political implications” (Garrison, “On the Ethics of Using Autotune — A Singer’s Perspective”). Throughout pop culture, we have seen this “false perception” and imagery come up in media, magazines, and now in music through the use of autotune. For new musicians who may not agree with the use of autotune, now find themselves in a difficult position as they have to compete with artists who enhance their performances and recordings. Without connections in the music industry and lack of technology, it creates an unfair playing field that fosters unhealthy comparison and competition. In addition to being damaging for up and coming artists, the ability to inauthentically produce in tune notes harms popular singers who rely on it. Ali states, “The singers stop learning proper technique because they begin to rely on the technology to “take care of it”. They get lazy, instead of figuring out why their pitch might be suffering, and working it out technically. Or it ceases to allow the subtle gradations of pitch to be governed and artistically chosen by the singer, who needs to be carefully considering the style, genre and character of the music, the time and the place” (Garrison, “On the Ethics of Using Autotune — A Singer’s Perspective”). Reliance on this software is causing artists to not work as hard on their craft and, instead, focus on quantity over quality because they know that they can use autotune as a “crutch” (Garrison, “On the Ethics of Using Autotune — A Singer’s Perspective”).
Extending beyond the scope of the music industry, autotune has also reared its ugly head in media through broadcasted singing competitions. For producers who are more interested in views and ratings, they are prepared to do anything to make their shows the most entertaining for audiences. This usually means using autotune on their contestants. Young, impressionable children with a love of music, such as myself, took to these shows as inspiration for what we wanted to become. What was happening in reality was that we were given a false representation of talent from kids our age. Unrealistic expectations and standards were put in place for the sake of increasing show ratings and viewer approvals. As expressed by Ali, “ I’ve seen how it effects some of my students…how it stifles them. This so-called “ideal”, takes a lot of the pleasure and delight out of amateur singing due to social expectations, self-consciousness and fear that a person can’t “measure up” to this perceived, false standard of perfection” (Garrison, “On the Ethics of Using Autotune — A Singer’s Perspective”). For some shows, such as the Voice, their motive lies in sales. For them, “if the song is performed well on the show, people are more likely to purchase the studio version of it” (Montplaisir et al., “We Break Down the Truth Behind Auto-Tune on Talent Shows”). Giant media conglomerates are using this technology to bring down the morale and spirit of aspiring musicians who look to shows such as The Voice and X-Factor for encouragement.
Another parallel can be drawn here to the content moderation reading mentioned earlier in the article. The piece explains, “Internet connectivity went from being a niche experience available to a designated few cloistered in universities and international research-and-development facilities, with denizens who were computer and tech geeks, engineers and computer science majors, to an all-encompassing medium of commerce, communication, finance, employment, entertainment, and social engagement” (Roberts, 7). For the music industry, it began as exclusively those with incredible music abilities and connections. After the introduction of autotune, doing well the music industry became more of a reality as musicians were now able to alter their sound to produce music, live and recorded, that catered to their audience without needing much talent. Now more than ever, the modern music industry and broadcasted music competitions use autotune to create what viewers would like to see and it has become an act for both musicians as well as viewers, rather than a showcase of pure musical talent.
Overall, from its creation, autotune has reshaped the music industry by allowing musicians and producers to alter musical performances, live and recorded. When used correctly, autotune has the ability to fix slight mishaps in vocal performance and tuning issues, in turn saving time and money for producers in recording studios. However, the psychological harm and malintent behind the use of autotune has shown to be a problem in the modern music industry. From the release of Cher’s hit song, “Believe”, many artists have taken it upon themselves to use autotune technology to develop their own “distinct sonic texture” (Fitzmaurice, “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History”). Upon using this software, artists such as T-Pain, Snoop Dogg, Lil’ Wayne, and Kanye West found themselves at the top of the Billboard Music Charts for several weeks with many hit songs. However, as this was happening, some artists became wary of the software’s ability to enhance, and took stands to protest. One such group, Death Cab for Cutie, went as far as to wear blue ribbons to the Grammys to show their disapproval of autotune (Fitzmaurice, “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History”). Some musicians and music lovers have taken to smaller stages such as online forums and news media to argue against the use of autotune. One such person, Ali Garrison, shared her personal experiences of the effects of autotune on students and other musicians. Ali claims that the “false perception” of “perfection”(Garrison, “On the Ethics of Using Autotune — A Singer’s Perspective”) has lowered morale for people looking to join the industry and share their own music. Autotune sets unrealistic expectations and barely achievable standards to those who want to share and pursue music without the use of this technology. When looking at the implications of autotune outside of the direct music industry, it is also prevalent in many broadcasted singing competitions such as The Voice and X-Factor. Similar to the sentiment regarding psychological harm due to unrealistic expectations, autotune use on these shows does a similar disservice to people who look up to these contestants and want to be like them, but the sheer perfection drives down morale and creates environments of insecurity and self-doubt. To make matters worse, the reason behind the use of autotune for television competitions is for views, higher viewer ratings, and album sales. Autotune, at its inception, was a tool that was meant to help with seismic data analysis (Jarvis, “Why autotune is bad”). However, when it was discovered to be a multi-faceted tool that could be used to enhance music as well, the industry was never the same. As said before, with great power comes great responsibility, and the misuse of autotune proves to have devastating effects on artists and music lovers alike.
References
12, Kyle Montplaisir, March, et al. “We Break down the Truth behind Auto-Tune on Talent Shows.” Talent Recap, 3 Mar. 2022, https://talentrecap.com/truth-behind-auto-tune/.
“Autotune.” autotune_1 Noun — Definition, Pictures, Pronunciation and Usage Notes | Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary at OxfordLearnersDictionaries.com, https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/autotune_1.
“Auto Tune: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.” Musicrow SoundLab, 20 Sept. 2015, http://mcrow.net/autotune/.
Fitzmaurice, Larry. “Great Moments in Auto-Tune History.” Vulture, New York, 14 Dec. 2018,
https://www.vulture.com/2018/12/great-moments-in-auto-tune-history.html.
Garrison, Ali. “On the Ethics of Using Autotune — a Singer’s Perspective.” LinkedIn, LinkedIn,
30 Oct. 2017, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ethics-using-autotune-singers-perspective-ali-garrison/.
Jarvis, Tom. “Why Autotune Is Bad.” Audio Ordeal, 30 Sept. 2019, https://audioordeal.co.uk/why-autotune-is-bad/.
Roberts, Sarah T. Behind the Screen: Content Moderation in the Shadows of Social Media, Yale University Press, 2019, pp. 1–7.
