How Auto-tune DESTROYED Popular Music: • How Auto-Tune DESTROYE... === Follow me: linktr.ee/patriciataxxon Download my (grid aligned) music: patriciataxxon.bandcamp.com/
I've studied art (I mean, the act of making art is studying it, really, but I went to an art academy is what I'm trying to say). It's disheartening to see how many people turn it into a competition. I mostly blame capitalism for that because there's a big "you can only make art if you are planning to make a career out of it" kind of vibe.
Which ironically is more in favour of Beato's point then hers, as he just wants to see the real thing all the mistakes left in that add character, whereas Pratrica wants enhanced people trying to get ahead in the sport without using what they have got to the fullest.
@wellwell7950 This is incredibly silly. Beato has clearly laid out his distaste with comping, time allignment etc by describing them as false fronts that disguise people's natural place in the hierarchy. I detailed the ways in which these practices do not as a rule create "better" art but are an aesthetic aim in and of themselves, discounting the hierarchy as a whole.
@@wellwell7950 every single artist you have ever listened to have production on their music unless you only listen to live music of people beating rocks in an auditorium in one take. Please walk into a professional recording studio and tell me all the incredibly expensive equiptment, sound desks, compressors, condensers, mixing and mastering engineers etc. Arent also just doing the exact same stuff you can now just do yourself at home on one DAW and explain how thats somehow cheating and not just an accessible way to make studio quality music thats been being made since studios even existed. The pic of John Lennon in the background is so funny, like he didn't in any way have any polish or engineering on any of his own or The Beatles' music; they just improvised it all in one take with a tape recorder
The funny thing about technical ability is that it is rarely recognized if you haven’t been previously exposed to it. I have a friend who has played guitar for going on 3 years and most people would say he’s “pretty good”, everyone has seen and heard other folks play guitar and my friend did focus on learning more technical skills. I on the other hand have been playing didgeridoo for 20 years, fellow didgeridoo players are absolutely astonished by my technical ability and stamina, I’ve played 2 hour long sets before with no breaks in between songs, but overwhelmingly the response from the layperson is “hehe it sounds like farts”. So what is more important? Being skilled, or being liked? Neither, it’s being satisfied with your own end product.
I think an important thing to keep in mind here is that Rick Beato comes from the prospective of old school rock music. As someone who likes old school rock and new modern edm I understand that they are fundamentally different from one another. He likes music that is organic and you like music that is quantized and precise. The point I’m trying to make here is that neither of you are right or wrong because with music it’s an art and beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
question....would you rather have a custom shop guitar, or one made by a CNC machine? That is Art vs Technology. In fact, listen to interviews with Deadmau5. He says he is a technician, rather than musician. Its easy enough to find on YT.
i agree, however it *is* wrong to proclaim that any one method of making music is any less valid than any other, which is what beato is doing with his 'autotune bad' stuff.
I think what Rick doesnt understand is that autotune can be really subtle if you’re not a musical expert- everyone uses it nowadays, and he probably doesn’t even notice. The “obvious autotuning” these people complain about is a stylistic choice and if you don’t like it, it’s not the fault of the tool but rather the artistic direction of the piece.
It is not like it autotune even made this a new thing, what about a vocoder? Same intended effect in most cases just autotune is far more simple. Neither is about correcting your pitch in many cases both are making vocal sounds no human could ever make. Does that not melt the foundation of his argument?
He most likely knows this, it's just that the popular undeducated hate on autotune gets a lot of views from regular non-musician audiences. He's feeding the algorithm. It's a shame.
@@n0etic_f0x the thing is vocoders still required the singer to also play the notes in whatever instrument they were playing, thus adding a layer of skill and respectability. I think Beato complains about what most musicians in my circles do, the lowering of the entry level and the market saturation. In the olden days it would be almost impossible to get anything recorded and showing something you did was truly a feat. Now any 15-year-old can produce an album on their iPad and it's mostly shit. People got used to shit and now if you don't do shit your music is boring to the normie ear. They need agressive sidechain, artificial voices, and a loud steady pulse.
@@roman_dimaggio huh????? more people producing art is a bad thing? and we need to close off the privilege of creation to an elite few? that's sorta wack
I think the problem with Rick Beato’s argument is that he thinks autotune and grid quantization is exclusively for hiding mistakes, rather than a new set of tools with infinite potential. Aphex twin and Venetian snares use editing to make beats and yet their production is an instrument in itself. We’re in a post-sample world where you can radically reshape the source audio, so why not think of playing guitar more as creating your own samples rather than some sacred constant that should never be flipped or changed?
For real, it was Aphex Twin who inspired me to start working in a DAW. And the more I've become adept at using my DAW to create what I want, the more I've realized that it's kind of an instrument in itself. There's a specific skillset you must adapt just like with guitar or drums. And the lack of live performance capability shouldn't even be relevant, considering people have been preconfiguring tape loops and noise machines for well over half a century (and in the case of the latter, an entire century!) and those are definitely instruments imo. It's so strange how people like Rick could be so comfortable making such strange proscriptions for musicianship.
Good point But ... Over the top and obvious auto tuning is sooo lame and always dying... thank god! Who the fug wants to hear tween tick-tick voiced music?!
He doesn't think that at all. He's stated multiple times that it can be used for artistic purposes, like how T-Pain uses it (and how Cher used it in Believe). But that's not the default in today's top hits, is it?
I hate the argument of "ai will replace artists" as if thats the issue and not the exploitation of artist's and, and under, capitalism. Art is about the creation, not consuming
That's true, but it does mean that some significant number of professional artists can get displaced by AI art. However, people will still make art, just like people still play chess. Though of course, professional sports have a different monetization structure that those used by professional artists, for the most part
sisyphism is so deeply ingrained in society. completely ignoring the actual problem, poverty, and just embracing all kinds of draconian bullshit to "protect" and "create" jobs. people gotta "earn a living" even if it is by make-work that doesn't add any value. social democracy is a hell of a drug.
the problem is when it's doing it by stealing art to train it. also it's been studied that a lot of times the ais just straight up throw the same image it "learned" from back
as someone currently studying production: the concept that splicing different takes together somehow removes a singer's ability just because they maybe fucked up once or had a version of a verse that they thought sounded better than the other is fucking baffling to me. musicians have been picking and choosing their preferences since humans as a species decided that noise could be pleasant and the fact we've been getting better at it and developing new tools to make it easier is actually pretty fucking cool, i think.
i think if it showcases anything then the abilities of the producer who edited the vocal take. because it's really hard to comp at such a level of precision without it sounding like crap
While I agree. I do think Rick's original argument here was misrepresented a bit. In the video he doesn't condemn all comping of takes, just excessive use of it. Where I kinda agree with him, at least to some extent. A few punch in on a vocal is fine, but if you go overboard you kind of lose the performance a bit. Which is of course in the end a matter of taste, it's not like one approach is more valid than another.
@@kassemir while i can understand that reading, i feel that it still misunderstands the purpose of comping in the first place, which is to give a better overall performance in the eyes of the author. fundamentally, the final performance is always dictated by whoever decides to put the song out, it isn't lost in the process but instead made within it. as the audience member, you will never actually get to hear that original performance as it'd just be a raw vocal track, so i find it a little silly to consider that a loss, it was never meant for us, it's just a piece of the puzzle. and while, of course, you could at the end of the day chop a vocal to the point where it's incomprehensible, there's no reason for that to be bad or devalued, a lot of more experimental genres of music use chopped up vocals for an aesthetic purpose and it works perfectly fine for what they are trying to accomplish. and realistically, rick isn't referring to experimental noise music that off put him but the practice in general which is never done to a degree where a natural sound is lost, at least when it comes to most pop music. so his claim that this technique makes it impossible to showcase the true ability of a singer is, to me, just completely unfounded.
As an accredited sound engineer, I laugh at this splicing take. They've been "splicing takes" since the advent of recorded technology. That's a literal part of production. Is he mad people record in different rooms, too? Does everything have to be one take for it to be good? He must hate Joy Division
@Michael Morgan Yeah, there is competition in terms of popularity and -- in academic settings mostly -- competition. But sports ARE competition. The reason they exist is as a form of competition. That's not the case with music at all.
Glad to see Maxx has decreed to us all what is and isn't an art form. Some (read: many) compositions cannot be played from start to finish on the artist's instrument or even by the artist's band. Ever see Zeppelin live?, half dozen guitar overdubs cannot be accomplished by a single player and I'll be damned if JP Jones could play keys and bass at the same time. How about the excrutiating cutting and splicing of tape by Scholz, who was actually revered in his time for doing that? Then look at the giant field of progressive guitar shredders in all genres, their playing is usually nothing more than finger acrobatics with side order of "look what I can do", whose albums should all be titled "All Fingers, No Song". The only reason Beat-off gets any reknowned guests on his videos is that the guest get eyes and a chance to promote themselves.
@@donnix1192 someone who has probably never made music in their lives. You actually have to have some kind of idea in order to make any kind of music. So just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it takes no Talent.
@@IVWilkinson I was just being sarcastic, but it gets lost in translation and came off the wrong way. I am a multi instrumentalist but electronic music takes discipline and creativity, I can’t stand music snobbery
IMHO Rick is worthy of much more respect, but then I’m 70 and have only been playing since I was 9. you can certainly disagree, why not, without being unkind and insulting.
As a drummer and someone who has done some Sound engineering in Rock you want a more authentic performance so yes over quantizing makes it sound robotic. Now that is also no excuse for a drummer to not know how to play to a click track. Beat detective is a great tool to fix minor mistakes in a drum session if you overdo it it’s not human. He is obviously speaking from the perspective of a rock producer and engineer not an EDM producer
Not necessarily? A lot of metal and rock musicians love a more digitised and clinical sound. Sample use is commonplace in a lot of heavy music. A lot of current era progressive bands love every note snapped to the grid. The issue is that Rick doesn’t seem to have a charitable bone in his body when it comes to certain production methods. It would be like an EDM producer coming out and saying organic, live-in-studio rock music isn’t valid because the errors are too distracting or come off as amateurish. It’s a nonsense argument (Rick’s) that attempts to create a production hierarchy, rather than just acknowledge production techniques for exactly what they are: tools to serve a greater artistic purpose. You can acknowledge the lived experience Beato has had without having to agree that an “authentic”, naturalistic performance is necessarily better than the inverse.
@voxextremos22 Even in rock, you have people like Joey Sturgis who have outright said they go into the studio intending to make bands sound "more perfect than they ever could be live"... capturing an idealized sound of a composition rather than raw energy. What exactly makes him any less valid of a producer than Rick? Nothing. Because audio engineering is just as much of a free artform as composition. F_ck anyone who says otherwise.
@@Sergio-nb4hj I never said Joey sturgis is in valid because he wants music to sound perfect. I personally think drum sampling helps because raw drums lack presence
It's foul mouthed and angry, yes, but no ad hominems that I noticed. The closest that come to ad hominems is calling him an old man, but even that isn't completely irrelevant, seeing as his pov is very biased towards old songwriting philosophies.
@@tomgio1 it's an insult. Not ad hominem. Ad hominem is when your argument is _just_ insults and nothing else. Here there is a clear distinct argument, with the insults sprinkled in between to signify frustration and anger. ad hominem can mostly be described as: "you hold position X but you are a clown, so position X is invalid", but here it is completely opposite, more like "you are a clown for holding position X", not "you are a clown so position X is invalid".
@@usrnewxnew5227 , respectfully I disagree. The person making the arguments here may well have several valid points, but the moment they call their adversary a name, typically pejorative, then that is textbook ad hominem. It’s a weak commentating/debating technique, and is not necessary if their base arguments are laid out against the content . If the disagreement of the critic is foul-mouthed or angry, that’s fine, as long as it’s against the ideas - not the person. When you stoop to the latter, that is ad hominem.
@@tomgio1 You contradict yourself when you mention a base argument and insults as a separate thing, when in fact, like I previously said, ad hominem is when the base argument _is_ the insults. Here, as you said yourself, there is a clear _base argument_ apart from the insults, so it ontologically cannot be "textbook" ad hominem.
As someone who has an actual degree in music theory I must admit it's frustrating to hear what i call corporatised music be the most popular in today's trend. I don't have any issue with edm or tech based music however it's the current trend amongst industry plants. I find today a lot of music is bastardised to push someone who more an influencer than musician. You tend to see it a lot with indie tik tok wannabes where they'll literally steal a loop and use it without changing a single thing and then proceed to sing their shitty auto tuned word spew. The general reasoning for traditionalist music is that the distinction between whats real and nit ks becoming harder and harder to distinguish. For example,In the past someone would be famous for their skill in signing as not everyone could reach that note or single like they did, it was special and unique. Technology should be used in music as it allows for more diversity and art. However I think real human performance will always triumph any technological based track any day. Don't like my opinion eat shit, it's my opinion
When music is "electronic" or electronic instruments are played in it, it is natural that these instruments are pitch perfect and on the beat (unless they are purposefull programmed to be not so...). That is their character... But that is a very different thing from turning human music, and especially the voice, into "quasi mechanical" sanitized meaningless goo.
Also, some of my favorite Beato-era music was from Yes. And their best albums were done by editing together snippets of tape with distinct jams and feels on them, even including accident (a part at the end of Close To The Edge, using way heavier vocal reverb than intended, but that was the best piece of tape they had for that spot). They wrote that way. I've tried it and it's way better than trying to compose stuff from beginning to end and only then, record it. So people were 'DAWing' in 1971 and making some of the best art of the day. You were just using magnetic tape and splices and loops, rather than a mouse and keyboard and screen. Eno would laugh at Rick's implications. The Beatles enjoyed the heck out of tape loops. Rick's doing click-bait.
Not to mention Brian Wilson was also very big on using that sort of method and he was doing that even further back as early as 64/65. He used it both as a compositional tool AND as an aid to help the other Beach Boys sing difficult sections of their songs. I love music with a focus on human performances, but being an elitist luddite has little artistic or practical value to anyone.
This is not the same thing. Fixing mistakes and editing is not the same as using studio tricks to make people who suck sound good. I know several music production and engineering people and they ALL say that today's tools can make anyone sound "good." If that's the case actual talent becomes something optional, no? A relative of mine in his 20s recently played me a track by a male vocalist who he thinks is one of the better singers today (his name escapes me). I listened to about a minute of it and asked him, "How can you tell if he's a good singer with all the autotune that's on there?" THAT'S the kind of thing that Rick and others are complaining about!
There's a vocal only track of 'Livin' on a Prayer' By Bon Jovi on RU-vid, and you can hear that the chorus is spliced together from multiple takes. Edited takes isn't a new thing.
That's pretty disingenuous. Beyond the fact that they had strict limitations on how much they could splice (and the fact that it cost a lot more money, making it so they would have to carefully pick what to edit), their actual takes were still live, and still the sound of musicians reacting to each other. God knows putting pitch correction on Jon Anderson would be a crime against the universe. None of their performances ever had to be "fixed" like everything is fixed today. Nowadays, hearing string slide noise is considered haram and you are a boomer for not wanting to edit the humanity out of your real playing. Guess that's just how it is.
There are still people who would harp on Beato for using pedals instead of embracing the guitar's natural tone, for using those guitar amps instead of maintaining correct dynamics and projection in an acoustic space, for using the "synthetic instrument" in front of him, or for endorsing singers who use microphones as crutches to get out of having to learn operatic techniques. I'd like to see Beato auto-tune himself, whip up the next electropop banger in 10 minutes, and argue that he's trying to showcase how "dishonest" and "easy" it all is. Some of the music that gives me the strongest emotional response was gridded in, synthesized from "unnatural saw waves", and backed by autotuned vocals.
@@g.boychev9355 Nothing. What about her post made you think she said otherwise? Her point is that, if using technology like autotune is merely cheating, and not an artistic choice, then so is using an electric guitar or a microphone.
You summed up the argument with technology perfectly. Well done. I left a comment and at point I say: "Having different degrees of technology snobbery is foolish. Either allow technology its' place or throw it ALL out."
The point Rick tries to make is that quantization and auto-tune are in part responsible for the democratization of music production and a perceived lowing of standards. More than anything actually due to the music model of record companies supporting creative artists dying entirely and the industry pretty much being run by silicon valley. I believe that these tools are just that, they help us make better music , but over use them or use them in a crass way and you'll suck the life out of the music. Fair point IMHO.
The issue here is that the music industry was never a heaven like it seems to have been. Rick Beato can't wrap his head around the fact that he likes white dudes playing guitar and everything else does not matter. The music industry has always been crap, it might get worse but at least I can now produce music and sell it from my bedroom, and not before.
@@hadrienhartgers3498Have you ever watched any of his videos or are you just assuming that this rage 3 minute video is all what Beato does in his channel?
@@lukarancini1630 oh yes i have watched Rick Beato's content. I'm not a music theory nerd so I got more drawn into his "what makes this song great" or "top 10 on spotify sucks" or "interviewing a white male" or "top of best guitar players with almost only white male guitarists". Maybe you can try to voice a counterargument to what i wrote.
I hate when people say "T-Pain can actually sing so why use auto tune?". The only way he can get auto tune to do what he gets it to do is because he's an amazing singer. The human voice slides from note to note seemlessly like a fretless string instrument. He's effectively turning the human voice into more of a fretted instrument where there are hard attacks to every note transition. He keeps his pitch within the bounds of one note purpusfully then transitions to the next note when he wants that abrupt change in pitch to happen. It's not just loosy goosy letting the autotune drive his vocals and just rangle them into the nearest note in key. He records live on twitch all the time showing his process, constantly singing into a live auto tune and doing extra takes when it isn't timed exactly right.
“ recognize music as auditory art and not a god-damned sport” YES. Exactly this. As long as the sound waves coming out of the speaker are producing the emotional effect on listeners that you intended how I don’t give a damn what you use to create it. The point is getting from inside your imagination, literally through thin air and into someone else’s imagination. the tools and techniques are irrelevant as long as they work for you. Growing up in the 70s and 80s I can’t tell you how long I have been bothered by the whole “music as competitive sport” thing people from my generation still cling to. It drives me nuts.
I feel any work, played off a recorded medium, or played on a stage for a big audience, can not tell the listener what it is - the listener decides what it is - to them. They walk out on the Rites of Spring, which in early 1900s was far more confronting a musical statement than anything at all since ... You need of course to understand what the work is all about. People rank everything now on social media - "under-rated" is the classic response. So, that music as sport tag is crap compared to what is happening in life right now. He/she/them/this is so Under-rated ...so under-rated ... the most under-rated cat...
most popular songs in recent times don't produce any effect in people, they're just background tracks people vibes to while doing everything else which is generally fine as a thing, but even as background music it's so oversimplified and post-processed and so easily forgettable. also, "music is an auditory art" do you even know what the word "art" means? Don't just fill your mouths and heads with terms and sentences that sound big just to look big and smart.
Yeah, why work on your skills if computer can fast produce generic pop songs that everybody forget after few weeks? 8 syllables I 8 syllables V 8 syllables vi 8 syllables IV *Changing instruments So emotional. Like listening back track vocal or real time autotune, from a speaker under live audio conditions, that usually sounds like crap compare to listening music from a record....it is sooo emotional. Not like thoose boomers who could just perform well with their voice and their instruments bc of years of dedication to their craft. Music isnt a life long passion. Its fast food with sounds. Whoever buys the latest most expensive plug-in is the better musician. Agree. 100%
well, in that case, you can always get Copilot to write both the lyrics and the music then. I mean that’s an AI program probably capable of doing that now. And it’s capable of emotionally moving people. Especially the lyrics. So what the hell are human beings, trying to create music for in the first place anymore? if it isn’t irrelevant now, it’ll probably be irrelevant another 20 years. Given AI program a prompt about what you want in a you want it played what sort of instrumentation you want in the playing of it. Tell the program what the lyrics are going to be press the button and sit back and shut up then get your airplay and your sales and your marketing in order or let Copilot do that for you as well and you’re literally have to do absolutely nothing. That’s the whole argument about the overuse of computers in the production of music. To me, the only use they have is in production they have nothing to do in production, other than what goes into the microphones from the artists. of course all you’re doing is producing electronic music. And that’s been around for over 60 years now? George Crumb. Karlheinz Stockhausen. That’s old now and nobody gives a crap. And BATTLE still right. Listen to the top 10 of the songs that are out there now and tell me that’s really great music. Are you kidding me?
Rick has, and shares, an incredible wealth of musical knowledge. If he doesn't like a lot of the new music .... that's his choice. At his age, and growing up when he did, he has been immersed in that music approach. He is always going to prefer a human beings hands touching a string or key. He will always prefer the human voice as it is ... naked, natural and real. Using new production techniques is going to be up to the person putting the song together. It's all taste and opinion. Rick is popular because he has knowledge that I hope is never lost and always passed on.
Im glad you said this people dont have to agree with Rick but he has paid his dues and has wide ranging knowlege to be respected .I dont agree with alot of what he says but there is a hell of a lot to learn from this man also
90% of my saved music is before 2000 and Rick pisses me off to no end. Music isn't going to evolve if we keep complaining about "the old stuff being better" Thank you for putting into words what I've felt for the last few years
Answer: There's a huge audience for complaining about modern (pop) music, and thoughtfulness and consistency aren't necessary for that. It's temping to write it off as an old person thing, but I've seen 2000s songs where the comments section has a few of those generic "better than anything on the radio these days" comments. If you have 2000s nostalgia, you're still young.
No in his video Rick definetly critizises the often used autotune and pitch correction as a non characteristic. Artists were you cant obviously see it and doesnt serves the musik but simply takes the character of their voice away by an algorythm
Maybe this could be discussed without having to insult people...but when you are always feeling insecure and lack self confidence maybe it is the only way you have to get clicks...
It's frustration. Rick always takes jabs at today's music scene for being bad and soulless in his eyes, and has done so for a long time, even with various other people soundly refuting his claims. When someone repeatedly discredits your art, you're bound to get angry and frustrated some or the other time.
@@usrnewxnew5227 Rick Beato never said that, he mostly criticizes some of the top trends on Spotify, which is very different...He knows there's huge talent in today's music scene (probably more than ever), it's just not in the spotlight anymore and that's what he is dissatisfied with. And about the "frustration", I think most people couldn't care less about this random guy's drama and frustration, this video is very weak at all levels.
What separates purely AI-generated art/music (procedural art generated from little more than a prompt) from any art/music created with the aid of an electronic device is ultimately the joy of the most important electronic device in the chain - your brain. Even if you autotune everything, run everything through chorus and reverb, grid things in, or even use random or procedural processes for select parts (including arps, random note generators, LFOs, limited AI, etc.), it is ultimately you who sets up the dominoes. Even if you sample someone else's work, purchase a sample pack, or just drag in whatever loops in Ableton or Logic, it is ultimately a statement of your mind - you like it enough to make it a part of your own work, as well as exercise enough artistic license and originality to make it something different while still practicing the sincerest form of flattery. To slightly paraphrase a quote from Dave Grohl - It's not about what goes on in a computer, but what happens inside your mind and heart. Drum machines have no soul, but the person who uses one does, even if only in metaphor.
Thank you. As a musician, and audio engineer, I needed someone to say it. People are so far up Rick's butt that they refuse to have thoughts of their own sometimes and that makes me the big mad lol
I think people just have this preconception about old music being good and new music being bad. Every generation does this so they are happily nodding to everything in agreement that vaguely confirms their believes. In 30 years, people will praise 2020s music and say how bad 2050s music has become.
I have no musical training, am I wrong to just think his assessment is absurd just on its face? If the goal is perfect pitch it is just a fractal failure. If the boal is perfect pitch it sounds robotic so it is not perfect pitch and I know they are cheating, so how is it doing what they intend? Also perfect from what standard to what ends? They are writing an original song, I know you can sing out of tune but it sounds like Beato is trying to say it is not matching a song that exists as if it is a bad cover or something. I have never heard autotune and thought they are doing it because their singing is not perfect despite the fact I have thought they are using it because they can not sing well, they are not using it to sound like they are more talented they are using it to sound better, I know it is not their real voice. They are doing it because it sounds cool not because it make them sound like they have more tallent.
@@n0etic_f0x Rick's an old producer. His values in the art form are all focused on capturing natural sounds and good performances. These values just don't line up with the same values expressed by electronic artists, and that's fine.
@@lorestraat8920 I mean, they do rather hinder music as an art form so... I would say they are outdated prior to even _his_ birth and I suppose that is fine in so far as it is not immoral or something like that but otherwise I see it as intensely limiting. We have been doing this far prior to autotune, this is down to the very concept of how music is mixed and mastered.
Negative sentiment drives the algorithm. Rick knows a lot about what he’s talking about in music and production. You just differ on taste and method. It should be ok that he’s not Merzbow fan #1. Just chalk it up to he’s old. Musicians of today stand on the backs of older folks like him and I’m not sure where we got off fully wanting them to disappear and “shut up”. Let him enjoy what he likes, I’m sure there’re some aesthetic thing you don’t like too.
Musicians today do not stand on the shoulders of Rick Beato. Look him up on Discogs - see anything there that inspired future generations? He's just some guy in the music industry. The frustration here is Beato using his platform to demean the work of contemporary musicians. Extremely uncool.
I make music at home... most of what I do is using amp modelling (these days a Quad Cortex), a Roland electric kit triggering SSD5 for drums and a variety of software synths built into Logic. A friend of mine's band has been lucky enough to have a small but tidy label backing to be able to spend a week or so in a decent pro studio to produce an album every couple of years, some of which I'm grateful to have been a part of. We were having a conversation a good while ago about "fake music" and how amp sims and MIDI drums are apparently the devil and one should only record music if you've got the means to do so "properly.. properly being with real drums in a real room with mics and real guitar amps pushing real air in a real room into mics etc. While I've got a large amount of respect for the guy, I had to put him in his place and basically said that not all musicians are lucky enough to be able to afford to rent a studio for a week or have a label front that cost for them. Music for me isn't a career, it's a hobby and as much as I love It I have to create within my means and budget and i'm sure it's the same for thousands of other people who make far more successful music than the stuff I write and record. I use pitch correction because I can't sing for shit but I want to put my voice on my music and it helps me do that. I don’t have capacity at home to record a full drumkit or a blazing guitar amp. Well… I sort of do but I don’t think I’d be living there much longer if I tried! Music is music regardless of what way it was documented. I'm sure there would have been people in the 90s balking at ADAT and computers/Pro Tools etc later down the line. I know for sure people in the late 90s and early 2000s were saying Pro Tools and drum replacement software would be the end of drummers yet drummers are still here.. Al and computers aren't taking over music and won't ever take over music, they're creating subgenres and engaging with people in different ways to what other people may like but at the end of the day, who gives a fuck? Stop moaning about music you don' like and listen to or create music you do like. Above all, stop listening to some asshole on the internet telling you what you should think about music and enjoy what you enjoy. Rick has some great content, mostly the interviews with other artists, but the opinion pieces are doing nothing but further closing already closed minds and shitting on what others would call art.
I see both sides, neither is wrong here is why. Musicians are like painters relying on physical abilities. Then comes along cameras and the painter is no longer needed. The camera takes perfect pictures and anyone can do it. What would take a lifetime to perfect now it’s just a push of a button . Being a great computer operator, and a great musician two different things. An artist and a photographer is two different things while a child can push a button on a camera and take a decent photo. Give him a paintbrush, and you’ll see the difference. Watching the Super Bowl and playing Nintendo is two different things human performance (physical abilities). This is why we watched the Olympics.
Sideways has a great video essay about Autotune that delves deeper into the points you go over for it. Also as a electronic music, vocaloid, and “let the autotune go crazy”-song enjoyer, I love bots and how we’ve worked with them to create art. As long as peoples art isnt being repackaged and resold by bots (and their controllers) without consent, let them be
I feel like this is like saying "metal is rock music"... like, yeah you're not technically wrong but there's a generally recognized division between the two for a reason. Hip hop and electronic music culturally exist within two different zones, even though many musical elements are shared among them.
okay imma just be that guy. I agree with Patricia and i think she laid out her points really well, but I feel like this isn't gonna do anything for anyone who doesn't already agree with her.
I mean. I dont think this video is to win over people who are against autotune. Its waay too short compared to her other videos. I think this is just her expressing passionate thoughts and feelings
@@wiggy009 And sometimes thats an artistic choice. If he wants to dislike it he can. But he needs to make it clear Thats his subjective opinion Edit: my brain changed thought middtype
He is a bit of a dinosaur but there is useful info there as well. Cut old people like us some slack! His gripe about comping shows the one thing which is really his biggest weakness - he admitted he really dislikes to DO vocal production. And that's the one thing I love the most, long live Variaudio! You can really bring out gems even with technically not so proficient singers, it's all about the bringing out the soul in the performance.
If you didn’t come from the era - or aren’t versed in the music - Rick uses as a point of reference how can you judge his opinion? I think he’s right to a large extent. Just because you’re rude and insulting doesn’t give you credibility.
Honestly tho. There’s a reason why so many people don’t even listen to modern music. I’m in high school and I mostly listen to older stuff (70s/80s) and many of my friends do the same.
Uhhhhhhhhhhhh you mean folk music? Because that's 99% of folk music... Or jazz? Or classical? Or black metal/doom metal/sludge metal/grindcore/math rock/brutal prog/Zeuhl/punk rock/traditional/free improv/outsider music/electroacoustic/experimental/blues/etc.? Like come oooooooon. Did you forget that about 1/3 of all music being made is fairly raw?
Also - people are constantly confusing "auto-tune" (a real-time audio manipulation plugin by Antares) and "pitch correction" (an (offline) audio editing technique for editing individual notes pitches after the fact (implemented by apps like melodyne)) These are completely two different things and are used for two different things. Auto-tune was historically ("when you believe"), and still is, a stylistic choice. It is like putting reverb on your vocals. It's a realtime processing plugin. Pitch correction is the same is "comping" or "quantization", in a sense that it is just an editing technique, and like many other technologies - it just saves time and money. If the vocalist made a mistake, instead of recording them again, you can just edit the mistake out. It could be very subtle and completely unnoticeable if the original take was very close. Most people (including beato) wouldn't notice it, unless the original singer was not very good, which makes the edits sound heavy. (Emma Watson in the beauty and beast movie for example, in which it's clearly NOT a styling choice to pitch correct) The irony is - that Rick is also using technologies both as a styling choice and to save time and money. The amplifier - for example - is not used merely to increase the instrument volume, it's literally changing its color in an unnatural way. Similarly - traditional rock bands would frequently record different instruments separately to make it easier to edit and mix, which is also something that was not always possible. So it's really unclear why he's frowning upon this, except the subjective opinion that he just doesn't like that genre of music.
Well, the impression I've gotten of him from other people talking about him and the kind of things he complains about is that he just doesn't like any of the music kids these days listen to and wants to somehow "prove" the music he grew up with is objectively better music. See for example 12tone's video "No, Today's Music Isn't Boring (A Response To Rick Beato)", from nearly two years ago. It's responding to Rick making basically the exact same claim, except from a music theory standpoint instead of a technological one. Basically, "The songs I grew up with used the 'good' music theory, so they're all pieces of art, while songs today use the 'bad' music theory, so they're boring and less innovative" without even attempting to understand what they're actually doing, why they're doing it, and why it's popular. Basically, he's just a boomer yelling at kids to get off his lawn. While sitting in a public park.
"unless the original singer was not very good, which makes the edits sound heavy" Well, this is the main point, isn't it? How on earth can you tell who's good and who isn't when EVERYTHING is auto-tuned and pitch-corrected? Especially when "young people" describe people who can actually sing as "pitchy"? The fact is that these tools can make virtually anyone sound "good" according to today's bass-ackwards standards. So it's not the use that's being decried -- it's the rampant overuse. Someone I know does production work with rap and hip-hop artists, and has stated that auto-tune is primarily used by male rappers because they think they can sing, but they can't. It should stand to reason that just because you can rap doesn't mean you can sing, but apparently many of them don't get it.
@@robgrano6814 Pitch is much less important than you think. A good take is a good take even if it's a bit pitchy. Auto-tune has certain limits in order to sound "natural" or less noticeable, You still need to be able to sing well and then pitch correction can try to fix intonation problems if necessary. Whereas a bad take with autotune still sounds bad. Have you ever tried it? Have you ever recorded a vocal take that just has no soul or swing or anything and tried to pitch correct it? It doesn't get better at all, it still sucks. You need to really transform the audio in order for it to be usable, it's not a situation where you apply autotune and immediatly think "oh now I can't tell if the singer's good or not". I have tried to fix vocals with autotune and when the take's not good, there's not much you can do. I have myself recorded vocals that completely sucked and pitch correction didn't help at all. Good pitch is only one out of many many ingredients a good singer should possess but it's not the most important one.
@@Merceauroix Agree, but surely good pitch is one of the basic ingredients? "He's a really good singer except for the fact that his pitch is off," isn't exactly something you hear all that often. I realize that if a performance doesn't have soul or swing or a good feel it can't be fixed by autotune. What I'm talking about are those instances in which the performers are simply not good singers, but they are artificially made to sound good via manipulation. Surely you've heard singers that sound great on recordings, but when you hear them live it's a whole other story?
I honestly don't know any performer who is simply not good but is artificially made to sound good. Autotune can get you 10% closer to what you want, best case scenario. But if you're a 2, it most certainly doesn't make you sound like an 8.
You made a video just to cry... Yeah. You need to be more respectful. Let that sink in "You made a video just to cry..." At the end of the day, everyone will remember who Beato was. But not you...😢
You made a comment just to cry... Yeah. You need to be more respectful. Let that sink in.. "You made a video just to cry..." At the end of the day, everyone will remember who Patricia Taxxon was. But not you... By the way, typing like this makes you look like a complete clown and even mimicking it made me feel pathetic. Let that sink in if you need an extra sink.
I think his concerns with music generated by real humans eventually becoming indiscernible from an AI at Sony-Disney McMoneystacks Audio Division are pretty legit. The homogeneity of production methods, and average consumers leaning toward that preference (or not caring) will definitely render other methods of composing obsolete for a ton of applications. All that will eventually matter is having a palatable product that can be comfortably consumed by the average listener, or used in other commercial applications. Everything becomes commodified, and as expendable and reproduce-able as possible. Writing music with physical instruments and real humans will probably age like spoken poetry or theater. Relegated to the eccentrics and hipsters and enthusiasts. Not the end of the world by any means, but still a bummer.
@@The_Cadaver Isn't that where the problem lies? I agree, at the point that it becomes algorithms and A.I., it may as well be Muzak. As a Musician/Producer (not on Rick's level), it is distressing. Some may have no preference between Jimi Hendrix and lines of code. As Rush said long ago "All of this machinery making modern music can still be opened hearted." I do have a digital studio, but that's about where the digital part ends, as I use it as you would use a Console and Studer 24 track. I use real instruments (college town helps). I don't want to display my total lack of brevity, but what and why I am doing what I am. I am a now disabled Art History Prof. Music is one of my loves I can still do, and I decided, now that one of my band is deceased, one has vanished from everyone around him, and another, well just best not re-visited. I have a backlog of songs to arrange and record, as does my oldest Son. However, the over4arching goal is to have a musician's collective...no studio fees, I produce demos for bands to send to clubs, as they build their tours. It is a passion for myself, as I am sure it is for Rick. Summing up, once you remove humanity from Art, it ceases to be Art, ImO, as The Arts is where we best express our humanity, and Music is of particular importance being that its name comes from the muses.Again, please forgive my lack of brevity, but you began a very nice thread on this, and I am as strong on this one, as I would be when they inevitably have a robot that can precisely replicate any Great Painting or Sculpture. Be Well, and Thanks, -trout
"but if songs are going to be hyper-edited through pitch correction, timing correction, note-by-note... guitar pl-- there's guitar players out there that punch in every single note, every note is fixed, every note is... is manipulated somehow." why yes this guy i just made up is ridiculous
I know guitarists who do this. And the fact is that there's nothing wrong with that. It's still not easy to compose a good metal song, whether or not you "cheat" when you record it.
This isn't just a "boomer mindset", I'm 18 and I too agree with Rick. With all this technology, it takes away from the human element of music. That slightly out of time snare creating just that bit of extra space, the chorusing effect on different instruments that aren't perfectly tuned (which in itself makes it more interesting and sound thicker), all of this will be lost! Music is an art form and yes, technically art in the eye of the beholder, however having technology produce nearly 100% of your art doesn't even make it yours, you can just move a mouse and and click buttons just like anyone else. In my opinion, Autotune should be used as a special instrument, a good example of this being John Mayer's backing vocals being made into an almost vocal synth in his song 'New Light'. Using quantisation, Autotune and whatever else there is to completely hide the fact that you did not even try when making your music is sad.
Some people like authentic performances in music. You have to understand, it's a completely different territory of music that's why there's seemingly no common ground with people like you and people like Rick. When you record an authentic performance it has an irreplaceable authentic feel, flow to it, something you would hear live but better. A producer like this would view their job as the duty to capture each and every nuances of the performers, the unique sound of their voice, the unique sound of a guitar going through all sorts of equipment and making an unique sound right there in a room. For a producer like this adjusting everything to a grid and altering everything is basically the equivalent for the stereotypical Italian to put lots of ketchup on some pasta and call it spaghetti.
Exactly and well said. Rick and whoever this guy is are just on completely separate pages, and while I understand where this guy’s coming from, I’m 100% in agreement with Rick (and no, I’m not a boomer). To me, when everything is locked in, every vocal note auto tuned (no matter how subtle), and everything is just overproduced, it’s just very… clinical to me. But that’s just me, and it’s fine that others would disagree. I don’t understand why this guy is so angry about it. Enjoying different things is what makes the world go round. This is like arguing tube vs SS/modelers, analog vs digital, vinyl or tape vs.. ok, you get the idea. But for me, a full performance caught raw and natural without editing, done well, is something special. It’s why a great sounding live performance direct from the board can send shivers down my spine. Because I can feel what the audience, or even the band members feel. Like when I’m just jamming with some friends and we have one of those “moments.” Idk how to describe it, but other musicians will understand. Where you just all click, and without a single word, you’ve all communicated with each other, and just kind of nod along and smile/laugh a bit. This raw energy on so many live albums is also captured on so many regular albums, with many bands, like zeppelin for instance, leaving the mistakes in. I personally prefer that then to those that today would just splice that part out and fix it. To me, it’s the difference between human souls coming together and making music versus the slippery slope of tech made music where the endpoint is something similar to ChatGpt or whatever it’s called just algorithmically putting a song together. Long rant, and it’s clear what my opinion is, but ultimately, music is meant to be enjoyed, and if you enjoy the more digital, locked in, auto tuned voices, “snap to grid” beats, etc., then that’s fine to. To me it just loses the magic
Also the ‘autotune is bad and for hacks’ crowd saying “T-Pain use auto tune, but he sing pretty????” thing will never cease to infuriate and amaze me. Like how do these two apparently incompatible things coexist in their brain without enough dissonance that they won’t make the obvious logical leap that maybe it has nothing to do with how well or not he (or other people utilizing autotune as effect) can sing. But instead arrive at the obvious idea that this was an artistic choice, which at the time set him apart from his peers in the music industry. Which should be obvious since you guys STILL bring him up anytime autotune is mentioned.
I'm glad more people are calling him out on his bullshit. I used to follow him, and found his videos insightful, but i noticed more and more laughably cliche "boomer takes" on his channel and eventually I had to unsubscribe, because a lot of his "low information music" rants are borderline racist, and definitely ageist. And this was YEARS ago. I genuinely wanted to see him turn around and listen to the criticism and grow from it, but that ship has fully sailed by now. It's really sad to see. He has so much potential but he's wasting it getting mad at anyone who he perceives as not working as hard as he did to get their recognition. It's really petty and insecure and sadly so common.
@@andymccallum8090 the way he calls certain music "low information", often regarding Black music. If you don't see it, I probably can't convince you. It's not overt, it's just a subtle thing.
I could have phrased it better; it's not racist per se, but it could reinforce racist talking points such as Ben Shapiro's claim that "rap isn't music" because it lacks certain harmonic complexity. The way Rick acts as if harmonic complexity is an objective measure of musical quality lines up perfectly with Ben's argument.
@@evelyntelevision jazz music has some of the most sophisticated harmony in all of music and it's black music. Also songs don't need to complex chord changes to be good. But I've seen his videos and I totally agree with him when he says people should experiment more with chords Try some things instead of copying and pasting the same boring chord progressions with the same annoying drum samples etc.
yes it all makes sense, the argument is good, a very witty rationalization of the fact we have been using processing such as autotuning and quantization to, most of the time, correct performers´ lack of skill. No it´s no comparable to pedal effects, not comparable, synths, or drum machines. People very, very rarely would use any of these to make up for their inability to play and instrument well. Music is not a sport, but there are too many amazing musicians around the world for us to hand it over completely to technicians and programmers of any kind.
I agree with you. There's truth in both sides here. AT and quantization obviously have important creative applications. I think what Rick was saying is that, outside of their creative use, these tools are too often abused in the revision process. My takeaway is that musicians shouldn't feel the need to tune and comp away every imperfection. We've collectively been overdoing it for the last 25 years and have shifted the artistic standard from "human" to "objectively perfect". It actually seems pretty toxic when you think about it!
Every single thing Rick does displays a wealth of technical knowledge that is somehow completely detached from every other way of looking at music. He reduces children's music education to a means of learning impressive perfect pitch party tricks. He reduces music production to a series of gradable tasks where the finished product is worth less than the sum of its parts. He reduces rich cultural and communal traditions like jazz to a collection of chromatic melodies and extended chord voicings. I'll never forget clicking on that video where he listens to "Light Switch" by Charlie Puth and speculates that it wasn't a bigger hit because it was "too interesting". He'll shine a light on the most flavorless and inessential piece of art he comes across, as long as it clears a high level of technical competence. Literally nothing else matters to Rick, and that's such a sad way to experience art in my opinion.
He does have some of this show off, technicality valuing mindset, in one video he literally opened a sheet music book of late Beethoven just to show how many notes he had written while being deaf, which is just so far from the point, but he's also just genuinely enthusiastic about music and teaching it to others. I think, he's just an open minded musician who got old and has no self awareness about it. In his Great Songs By Artists You Hate video he enjoys a rather simple coldplay song, and calls it one of his favorites, and analises it in a very musical way imo as he plays it. He also has a video (The Most Beautiful 2 Minutes of Music) where he talks about a section from Keith Jarrett and he seems to like it for the flow, not the technicality.
u had me at "party tricks" cos i don't think there's any better way it could be put. i was characterised by those that raised me as a genius cos i had perfect pitch, but i knew way too well that if i stepped into a room full of musicians, half of them would have it too. it wouldn't be special. and i bet there's thousands of Former Gifted Kids watching sir beato's videos to boost their egos
@Teefus not sure if this is bait but i'll bite: he is doing that, sure, but with a bias and an air of superiority. this video wasn't about his music theory lessons, it was about his conservative attitude toward electronic and pop production, specifically auto-tune. rick will teach you theory, for sure, but he'll shame you along the way for listening to, or even enjoying, what he views as lesser music
@@haleys_hus because there is more complicated styles and virtuosity in music you can't critizice those styles. You guys don't understand that some people wants complication in art, and that guys didn't like other more simple or direct styles. You guys are doing the same that Rick but worst. You need to come to your own little place to criticize people that love complicated music, that probably like simple music too, or more direct, and very probably listen to way more styles than you. Doing just the same you denounce. Listen whatever makes you happy, and play whatever you like or can, but using Rick very own personal opinion of an plug in, to explode on "more complex music" is just not very honorable
He’s a very bitter person. always trying to drag everything back to his stupid obsession with identifying notes. he devalues everything he talks about in some way given enough time
His Adele reaction talked about how natural and not auto-tuned it was, but to me it sounded completely autotuned, just not clamped down as hard, and with a bit less on the attack.
His Adele reaction felt so forced, just mindlessly praising the song just because it was different from basically everything else in the charts (and even then it's hardly a unique song on its own). He also has a bad habit of praising certain songs/artists while making sure to slam all of its contemporaries, gives off the vibes of "you're special unlike all the other girls".
@@iliketrains3495 that was literally his argument bro, he was just commenting the fact that you don’t need to sound like everyone else to be at the top charts, as we know most songs there actually do sound similar. This videos as well as the people in the comments scream functional illiteracy
@@GM-qz9fo if I remember correctly, the points where the notes locked in for a moment, before releasing. As if they kept the attack and release relatively loose, but clamped down the pitch on sustained notes.
Rick’s problem is that autotune and quantization are ubiquitous to the point where people don’t hear anything else. Not with the technologies in and of themselves.
Doesn't know anything about music creation or production? I think I'm going to trust the guy who's had around 30+ years in the industry, and still to today has many of those connections, over the guy who is too scared to put his face out and hides behind some weird anthropomorphic cat
I love most of your takes, and while I do think Beato is off on the deep end with the extent he rails on it, the real crux of the argument as I see it (and agree with) is that for the pop genre, the pursuit of reducing technical flaws has come at the expense of expressing the emotion it is going for. For music that is trying to sound electronic, that is the intended goal and outside the argument. But it makes a lot of recorded modern rock and pop sound flat in comparison to the live counterpart and to earlier pop and rock (including that for which i wasn't alive and isn't my own "good old days.") If that's a boomer take, so be it.
that seems to be more a consequence of the economic pressures on pop music rather than specific production techniques though. "a lot of pop music sounds made for a mass audience and hence is less interesting" is explained by "large music publishers see music artists as an investment and hence want safe bets--therefore this places pressure on pop artists to avoid doing anything highly experimental" rather than "the use of higher production values is specifically why today's music is worse". (there is also a recency bias going on here. when someone listens to pop music from 50 years ago, they're probably listening to the best of the best stuff, because that's what anyone remembers. when someone listens to the latest pop song on the radio, it's unlikely to be the absolute best. therefore, the Typical Modern Pop Song sounds worse than the Typical Pop Song From 50 Years Ago).
Exactly this… At the end of the day, all of these amazing tools can be used in whatever way you want… as tools of expression, crutches or both. Rick’s opinion is just that… an opinion… and the inclusion of the ‘comping’ grievance shows a bit of personal vitriol. As a successful producer in the ProTools time period, he clearly comps vocals… everyone does… and he talks about that at length in many videos, including the interview with Justin Hawkins. He’s talking about the negative impact when these tools are used as crutches and profit driven shortcuts by the musical industrial complex, which I’m very happy is getting its ass beat these days lol. Auto-tune, pitch correction, etc are easy targets to attack. Can they be used as a tool for good and not evil? Of course… And look, if you like sterile sounding music, with no variation of tempo, no feel, no humanness or any actual instruments being played for that matter, have at it! Clearly it’s a VERY popular formula these days… and art is in the eye of the beholder. There’s no arguing however that this tech has allowed waaay more people with very little talent and pretty faces to become famous ‘musicians’. If you like them, good for you… enjoy… but I personally do not. Steely Dan’s was Top40 back in the 80’s and is extremely complex music performed by some of the best studio musicians in the history of pop music. I don’t think I’ve heard anything like that on pop radio since well before Y2K. With that said, the radio is dying if not dead and it frankly sucked for the most part back then too.
Exactly, in a few words, modern production techniques are definitely welcomed when doing electronic music, or any other type of music were they fit well, in fact I myself made a lot of music using this kind of techniques, but it is shit when it's used in genres were the music is originally meant to sound 'natural' or 'human', and just becomes flat with it
In short modern technology allows someone who sucks to sound like he doesn’t suck. So, good that we have the resources to correct errors, but in that direction, the real talent will come from the guy behind the computer and not the artist. Execution, technique don’t mean shit anymore because the guy behind the controls will correct everything, so why bother practicing?
Nah, I'm on Rick's side. I'm all for experimentation and delving into newer textures of sound - but the vast amount of Auto tune I hear being used today is being used lazily.
It's not that autotune is the devil. The thing is that there is zero dynamic in running your voice in a program that "corrects" it. And that's the exact reason why synth music died of so fast. Music is an extension of our existence. It lives and breathes, it sways in tempo and pitch and there is simply no arguing about it. There's a reason why older bands still sell more records from 50 years ago compared to newer artists. I 100% believe that music is subjective and what someone might find as noise is someone else's favourite sounds, absolutely. And that's exactly why there isn't Pop or mainstream music anymore. Everything is niched in to whatever any one person wants to listen to at any given time and that's what people need to understand. Don't wait for warner to make a Metallica nr 2. Go out and find them yourself. Apart from autotune i believe that the reason music suck so massievly more nowadays compared to 5-10 years aho is also because of severe lack of timbre. Litterally every song is a sampled 15 sec part of a better already existing song, a hi hat 16th note mish mash. Some slight talking over it and reapeat. Mainstream music isn't designed to be groubdbreaking anymore. It's designed to be produced as cheapely as possible under 1 min long so that tiktok users can use it in their new dance videos so that it get's played over a billion times in just a second. It's major capitalist corporation ruining art in it's highest degree.
Well, to be honest, It's actually kind of refreshing. Not everything needs to be a 20+ minutes long video essay with an animated intro set to synth music. The video is consise and covers everything relevant. (I would still like another Patricia taxxon feature length video though)
@@osneket5713 Absolutely true, but something about the vid being so short just kinda tickles something in me, like "wow your takes were so bad that there wasn't even 10 minutes worth of essay needed to deal with it." That's just funny to me.
I agree somewhat that art is not a competitive sport. Though I believe, particularly for artists who play their art live, that they should be able to replicate much of their record on stage. So "overproducing" in whatever method (tape editing in Rick's day or pitch correction in the modern era) should be kept to a minimum.
Well there is an entire debate around this. No one can actually say what a live performing artist should or should not be doing on stage. I love performances that question what has been recorded, and improv on top of existing tracks. Digital music is now easily played live and results are mixed in my opinion.
When Rick Beato talks about subject he's actually well versed in, it's actually super interesting (imo). Take his interviews with people like Sting or Bernard Purdie - you can tell that he appreciates and understands their music and can offers genuine insight. It's just when he talks about music that lies completely outside of his perspective (a perspective heavily influenced by music academia as well as the Jazz Fusion music of the 70s and 80s) that it becomes grating. It'd be completely fine if he didn't like aspects of modern audio production, but treating Autotune/comping/quantizing like they're making music worse is just... dumb. Especially when he seemingly doesn't aknowledge his own perspective on the subject. But the "music is getting worse" narrative does get you a lot of attention, so I don't expect him to stop.
Yeah it's like half of all his videos are compelling, because he is well-versed in theory and has a good ear for chord structures and such, but the other half is hogwash that I don't want in my recommended. I wish he had a channel called "I'm a fucking boomer and have no goddamn idea what the hell I'm talking about" where he quarantined all his shitty takes on modern music, so that the only part of his content that would be irritating to me is his constant shilling of his music course.
There is fair evidence, far beyond the subjective, that music is in decline (at least in the mainstream). Scientific studies have actually delved into this and proven that people are responding less, both mentally and emotionally, to music. Music has always been, first and foremost, an communication with "the soul". Therefore, the loss of emotional connection is certainly most alarming. Additionally, the diversity in sound and musical ideas has also been proven to have gone into a vast decline. That's been directly connected to the use of so much programming and automation in music. I don't think those tools are useless, and I can say that I find computer midi programs helpful to me, but the problem seems to be when they step from a side tool to a central one in the final product, particularly at what are supposed to be the highest levels of music, where one has access to the finest musicians in the world.
@@smallworldbigworld-yi3xw Which studies are you referring to? I'd be genuinely curious to read them. As far as the decline in musical ideas: you're probably correct in saying that mainstream music has "lost" complexity in certain regards. But any loss of complexity in one paramater usually results in complexity and interesting ideas elsewhere. Take something like Lil Nas X' Montero. There isn't really much going an as far as chords or melody are concerned - but what the hell is that form? And how good is the vocal processing and production? To me, every kind of music offers a breadth of unique and interesting ideas/sounds etc. But you have to know where to look for them to appreciate them.
@@teamhammerbros8466 i will listen to a robot all day if a human is in the process to tell it what to do. the music isn't just the noises, it is just as much the creative idea and the feeling it invokes in the listener. if you prefer the feelings you get listening to whatever it is you listen to, that's perfectly fine, i'll stick to what i like and we can agree to disagree
The only problem I have with "over processed" music is when it's done by bands who can't perform half of it live. Going to a live show with high expectations set by amazing, studio quality tracks, just to hear stripped down, badly performed versions of the songs you love is such a letdown. This is mainly an issue with bands that play most or all of the instruments live though, and even though there are a lot of ways (backing tracks, effects or even auto tune) to make performances sound great live, I think a general rule of thumb should be "don't put out music you can't perform live". You can put out impossibly complicated songs if you want, but you can't not play those song live if they're the reason people want to see you perform.
Well said! have an really good example of this: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-gS1YDAc-f5I.html This demonstrates the dishonesty achieved via tech. To clarify....comping is nothing new, many songs in history have take 6 on the first verse, take 12 on a solo, and so forth. That is just editing, it's not snapping to a grid and perfecting a sub standard voice. Next, there were bands that did a type of pitch correction, but it would be simply increasing the tape speed to take the song to a higher key. The singer still has to be on pitch, but in some older recording this would be done, rather than re-recording to get the same result. I have all these gadget plugins in my studio, but I do not quantize, a click is all you get.,..stay in time.Will I use autotune? Yes, but only in this way; if a singer has done a knockout performance, but choked on a couple of notes, I don't see their repair as any different to punching in the notes.i refuse to polish a hack to sound brilliant. There are studies that will, but it will cost.
Agreed, except that I would not want to go see someone perform live with much of the music being the same backing used on the cd/mp3. Even more so if auto tune is used in the life performance. I can just stay home, for free, and listen to that, if I wanted to : ) I was lucky to grow up in a city where, on a given spring or summer night, fine and even incredible musicians that no one heard of would be playing on a corner as you walked under the street lights. They played incredible blues, jazz, folk rock, and more. It was extremely organic and they gave so much feeling to the night. Even on the colder days, one would be so graced as to hear such a talented soul playing in a downtown subway. I don't know how much it's like that, anymore, especially since The Big C, but those performances stick with me more than 99% of anything I've heard on a grocery store radio in the last couple of decades.
People listen to him as we respect him for being a knowledgable musician & educator & we love him for that & the knowledge he shares with us on his channel
That thing he said about making a tune by plugging in each individual note, you know who else did that? Beethoven. It's literally the whole basis behind the western classical tradition. Sometimes music is about the creativity of it's composer, not how fast you can get your fingers to wiggle their way into a solo
@@wiggy009 he recorded music with the best technology available to him at the time. I would argue that producers who create a song that did not previously exist are also writing music, regardless of whether or not instruments are involved. My point is that creating music in a way that considers each note, aims to correct mistakes, whether by hand or on a computer, even if there isn't a singular performance, is still creating music, and those who choose to do that are rarely making that choice out of ineptitude.
@@someonemcmystery2261 making music is not the same as writing it. When you write music it transcends its auditory medium, it becomes a text. Some people can later look at these texts and hear the music in their heads as literate people can look at a bunch of letters and hear the words they spell. A written piece of music can be later played by another musician who hasn’t heard the piece, without the aid of any electronic device. When you make music in a DAW you’re undoubtedly making music, but the end result is a wave file not a music sheet. Unless you transcribe what you made, you’re just making music, not writing it. Making music isn’t writing it, the same way recording speech isn’t writing.
It's pretty simple, He likes the old style of music that is made physically rather than digitally, He was a producer in the "Late 1900s" That's what he knows and likes, No point talking shit about him, It's like a Gamer and an MMA guy yelling at each other, Just accept that Music is vast enough to need separate schools of thought and learning and concern yourself with your own (Yes i know that implies he should stop talking about autotune, That's just what his comments want him to talk about)
I think there's definitely value in Beato's personal knowledge of music industry history, and the personalities behind the scenes. I like it when he talks about that stuff. But in no way does it justify his bad production takes. Good video, Patricia, you're completely correct.
There's no justifying having an opinion that you don't agree with? Listen to yourself. All i see in these comments are a bunch of woke snowflakes who try to cancel someone for disagreeing with them. Also, i'm pretty sure there's a fundamental misunderstanding here, but that's ofc kind of a prerequisite for any woke mob.. From what i've seen, Rick has only ever voiced his concerns about the music industry on a large scale and how technology affects the evolution of culture. He's not saying technology is fundamentally bad.
@@menamgamg Calling people "woke" for criticizing his opinion on something is really soft. I respect Rick's passion for what he does but attacking autotune for this reason is embarrassing and shows how unwilling he is to accept new things because it was a completely different game when he produced in the 90s.
@@menamgamg agreed, look i find rick beato bkring as hell but these people are overreacting to his opinion, like this guy saying "justifying" wtf since when do people have to justify musical opinion like they murdered someone.
@@cesarcampos8746 Well with woke society and cancel culture this is the law they have written, i.e. pulled out of their fucking asses. So now if a mob of people decides that your opinion is not ethical then they have the right to stop you by any means possible. The only thing they're not doing (yet) is colluding to physically go after people IRL.
I love and respect Rick, but you do make a good point. I'm a 59 year old music producer and I have messaged Rick pointing out that the way we make music today, is not the same as it was back in mine and Rick's day. What I mean is, when I was making music back then, you would find other like minded musicians and form a band. You would write, record and perform together. This does not happen as much now, as everything is done in the box using DAWs. It's just different tools that leads to different types of music. What Rick has forgotten is that it's always the tools that dictate the music we make and It's never the other way around! If you don't understand what I'm trying to say, think about how Hip Hop came about, because of drum machines and sampling. Rock and Roll was born from the electric guitar and amplification. Prog Rock used synths and multi track recording to create large music landscapes etc. I work with young musicians all the time and one guy carries his laptop with him everywhere. I said to him " that is your instrument." He and I gets it, Rick doesn't! It's all about being creative with the tools that you have. If you don't like the music you hear today ...turn it off!
Wrong. Why are you so easily convinced by this lispy dr*g queen who is just hating on Beato because Beato speaks the truth that talent is far far better than using computers. This is so obvious...only the sort of person who hates reality so much they might pretend to be the opposite g*nder, would have trouble digesting it.
@Robert Days But does he tho? From the way he compares modern music techniques to stable diffusion, which are very different processes, make him seem like he doesn't understand them as much as you think he does.
Many people have and do turn it off. Maybe because the soul of the music is edited out? Maybe not the "soul" but something that causes the emotional connection for me at least.
I didn't know there were "live music and performance is of the utmost sanctity" creeps who also used editing software, at all. Surely the process of recording live music fundamentally changes its cultural function? Surely the very idea of takes - that musicians will do the same performance over and over, before they get it perfect - is a technique that is only tolerable when that performance is being manipulated down into a single track? Not a lot of live musicians throw concerts of live rehearsals.
Also he has a keyboard and a lot of electric guitars. If he's a singer he better be not using a microphone because that's a lack of skill needed to Operatically project your voice.
Ever since he complained on The Create Unknown about "the younger generation not having life experience like the old rock-and-roll musicians did," this guy has left a bad taste in my mouth. It's nice (/s) to see he's reinforcing that bad first impression!
Are you scared? No need for that, it's just a discussion. The video was found because PT is using Rick as a draw, simple. I only commented because PT was so downright rude. He called him an ignorant and Mother Fucker? really? But you want a safe space and an opinion with no come backs? Someone please school me on where it all went wrong.
THANK YOU! My dad and I share a passion for music, and he's _pretty_ open-minded for a guy his age (I mean, he's were I get my varied taste in arts too). But for the last few years he's been watching Beato, he's been reverting to these boomer-esque rants about how music is now "objectively" worse than before, how pop music is now shit (when before we would... just not care at worst?) This is all pretty saddening...
What's the confusion here? He thinks natural voices sound better and so believes T-Pain's use of auto-tune distorts/obscures a vocal style that he prefers. What does it matter that T-pain chooses to auto-tune his voice? Artists make intentional choices all the time that their fans dislike. T-Pain's natural singing ability doesn't make him automatically "right" about auto-tune. It's not like Beato "doesn't understand" something, he just disagrees with that choice. And it's weird that you think Rick doesn't "understand" the subject matter overall when he really he just has a different aesthetic than you. The notion that he's totally ignorant of the craft is bizarre, when he's worked in the industry for literally decades. Overall, just bizarrely bitter and vitriolic over something that's mostly a matter of personal taste.
weird how technological advancement in music just so happened to peak in the era rick beato grew up in apparently any progress made before he was a kid (distortion, sound recording, electricity in general, etc) was totally fine and did not ruin music, and anything made after is sacrilege to the musical gods what a wild coincidence
Did you even watch his video though? He specifically mentions how auto tune CAN be used creatively. You can’t deny there’s a shameless overuse of auto tune. When used to cover up bad vocals it literally does ruin music. It’s not too much to ask that singers be able to… sing. I find a lot of Rick Beatos takes quite ‘boomer ish’ but this one is legitimately well founded.
Besides, even if someone has terrible pitch and has to use autotune in order for their singing to be remotely palatable, who gives a shit? (And I know Patricia basically says this in the video, but) music isn't a sport, and you can't cheat at it.
Basically my thought about the whole Rick Beato video: And? What's the point? Music is bad because of beat correction and auto-tune? Like "artificiality" is a form of objectively measuring music quality? I don't get it.
i feel like there's 2 sides to this. music is an artistic medium, so you should obviously be allowed to make what you want to make how you want to make it. quantization and pitch-correction is just an particular sound some people want to incorporate in their music. no one should take this away from anyone. *but* i think he has a point. what this also means is, since (pop) music is also a money-making machine, people who have no real love for the craft can become huge if they just have the right sound and release their stuff at the right time. yes t-pain can sing really well, but quite a few of the 0 ms attack auto-tuned rappers i've heard sound like they can't. i'd imagine this has resulted in the variation in pop music having dwindled quite a bit these last few years, though i feel like it's recently been coming back. im saying this as a person who can barely play any instruments and almost purely makes niche edm stuff, i just have no aspirations to become super rich off it or anything haha.
He is going to lose his mind when he finds out about vocaloid/utualoid. The computer has already completely replaced the singer! And yet most songs are still sung by humans.
breaking news: local boomer complains about people using electronics to help their music sound the way they want it to; still uses electronic keyboard and guitars. more at 8.
Electric keyboard and guitar being compared to auto tuning a voice is starkly different. If I press the A key on an electric keyboard it’s an A. If I tuned my guitar and the strings are decent I’ll get an A. Singing an A without being an amazing singer doesn’t produce a consistent A. If you actually watch Rick’s content he’s not against electronic music, he’s for it. What he’s against is taking someone who clearly cannot sing well because they’re not talented or hard working enough, and faking their sound by abusing an otherwise useful tool.
Yeah, using electronic assistance where the artists has deficiencies is fucked. It's like a golf pro having some electronic device that helps where their game is lacking
I cant stand vocal pitch correction, as I am a singer too, I'd feel like i'd cheated the audience if I could only sound good using an autotuner. thats my personal choice. However most of the other points I agree on. especially splicing and joining musical parts , background noises etc. Sgt peppers is loaded with snippets and heavy editing and splicing, so is dark side of the moon. I can't imagine the impact on modern music if albums like those never existed. I will say though the pressure on vocalists in a band is ludicrous, you're expected to learn every lyric, and if you hit a bum note it's like the end of the world. yet I've never been in a band where the musicians always played note perfect, but thats acceptable as long as its not vocals.
Nope you’re wrong. It’s the OVERUSE and DEPENDENCE on these technologies and practices. There is a reason that the recording industry is failing and it isn’t Spotify.
I actually think both of you are right because music is an “auditory art”. When I hear new music it sounds artificial and computer generated…to me. That being said my daughter has an emotional reaction to new music, so she doesn’t hear what I hear. Rick might be a few years older than myself but not by much. I think it is real simple, we didn’t grow up hearing music like this. I don’t mean the style, I mean the production. To an older person’s ears it sounds like a computer (for lack of a better word). I can listen to punk rock from the 80s that sounds like it was recorded inside a potato with a tin can as a microphone and I can feel emotional about the music. Meanwhile, I hear the songs on pop music stations (even the rock) and it sounds emotionless because of the production. You are both correct. If the two of you swapped ages I would bet you would hear music the way Rick does and he would hear it the way you do.
I really do not think this is just a difference in taste, Rick made several categorical claims in this video that I objectively disagree with. He decries recording methods that had become the industry standard in HIS time, he misunderstands AI and all but directly wields it as a form of comeuppance for what he sees as hacky musicians who rely on tools that have been around since before I was born. This is a thirty year old argument that he is attempting to spruce up with baseless scaremongering about AI, it is not merely a difference in taste. I don't want to imply that my age has nothing to do with my taste, I'm not huge on today's pop music but I find a lot of emotion in skillful production and a well balanced mix. However, I also cried listening to Nattens Madrigal, so I think I understand the appeal of potato tin can music, and I still think Rick is full of beans. I never once made any categorical claims about the inherent goodness of autotune or quantization, Rick claimed that it represented a degeneration of musical artistry. We are not making the same argument.
I dunno, you cannot claim to be objective when you throw out ageist epithets. With all generations, people generally expect that sucky music only exists in the past. There could very well a time in the future where you feel the same way Rick does about some other audio tech (he didn't see it coming either). In any event, glad to see your temper faded. You can't be the old person yelling at clouds, now can you? ;)
