David Gilmour - Rattle That Lock

[JediJoker]

...recording the vocals with Crosby & Nash!

[video=youtube;05Jk0UYFO1M]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05Jk0UYFO1M[/video]

Aieeeeee... The pitch correction on their vocals is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.

 

[Jim the Oldbie]

Aieeeeee... The pitch correction on their vocals is like fingernails on a chalkboard to me.

Huh?

If this is autotuned, wouldn't they have done a "better" job of it? Gilmour's voice in particular sounds noticeably wavering or frail to me at certain moments here. (Not meant as criticism; rather I think his voice reflects his years, and the mood of the song, quite nicely.)

I'm usually pretty sensitive to autotuning, but I'm not hearing it on this clip.

-- Jim

 

[Jim the Oldbie]

I'd been dragging my feet on this one...but no more. Pre-ordered...I like the way those clips sound....just excellent!

I know what you mean... Dunno if i would call this groundbreaking stuff, but the guy definitely knows how to push those old buttons! Sounds pretty damn nice to me too. Just wish it weren't so damn expensive.

Sorry if this has been covered, but: I assume the DVD in the (somewhat cheaper) CD/DVD package does not have a DVD-A layer, right? In other words, in order to get hi-res audio, we gotta get the Blu-Ray?

-- Jim

 

[rtbluray]

Sorry if this has been covered, but: I assume the DVD in the (somewhat cheaper) CD/DVD package does not have a DVD-A layer, right? In other words, in order to get hi-res audio, we gotta get the Blu-Ray?

-- Jim

Yes, that's correct. The CD/DVD package contains a DVD-V disc with DTS and Dolby 5.1, just like "The Division Bell" and "The Endless River". No high-res options for surround on the DVD, just the Blu-Ray.

 

[rtbluray]

Huh?

If this is autotuned, wouldn't they have done a "better" job of it? Gilmour's voice in particular sounds noticeably wavering or frail to me at certain moments here. (Not meant as criticism; rather I think his voice reflects his years, and the mood of the song, quite nicely.)

I'm usually pretty sensitive to autotuning, but I'm not hearing it on this clip.

-- Jim

THANK YOU!
I wasn't hearing it either, which either means it's not there, or if it is, it's done really well, but I highly doubt it's there given who's singing on it.

 

[Clint Eastwood]

Various combos on the website HERE

 

[JediJoker]

Huh?

If this is autotuned, wouldn't they have done a "better" job of it? Gilmour's voice in particular sounds noticeably wavering or frail to me at certain moments here. (Not meant as criticism; rather I think his voice reflects his years, and the mood of the song, quite nicely.)

I'm usually pretty sensitive to autotuning, but I'm not hearing it on this clip.

-- Jim

THANK YOU!
I wasn't hearing it either, which either means it's not there, or if it is, it's done really well, but I highly doubt it's there given who's singing on it.

Oh, it's there, alright. Professional singer and recording engineer here. My ears are very sensitive to these things, but given how glaring it was to me, I would have thought it would be obvious to most music enthusiasts. It's not necessarily AutoTune; it could be offline pitch correction. It's definitely of that ilk, though, and not something like Pro Tools' Elastic Pitch. It's especially obvious when they transition through pitches very quickly, like at ~1:15 in the video. The human voice does not sound like that, and no group of singers–especially not mostly untrained pop vocalists in their 60s and 70s–harmonizes with that kind of cold, technological precision.

 

[splinter7]

So the the fact that it doesn't sound like crap makes it like fingernails on a chalkboard?

--Greg

 

[paligap]

Oh, it's there, alright. Professional singer and recording engineer here. My ears are very sensitive to these things, but given how glaring it was to me, I would have thought it would be obvious to most music enthusiasts. It's not necessarily AutoTune; it could be offline pitch correction. It's definitely of that ilk, though, and not something like Pro Tools' Elastic Pitch. It's especially obvious when they transition through pitches very quickly, like at ~1:15 in the video. The human voice does not sound like that, and no group of singers–especially not mostly untrained pop vocalists in their 60s and 70s–harmonizes with that kind of cold, technological precision.

Well, I guess that settles it, then.

 

[jimfisheye]

You can hear autotune warbling through the thick mush of lossy compression that is a youtube video!? All I hear is the sound of mp3 X 1000 that is youtube. As I would expect from... youtube. Think of YT like the new AM radio. It's just fine for what it does.

Perfect tight harmonies? They might have nailed that. Or mostly nailed it and then slip edited the ones that missed a little. By the time the talent said "was that 3rd line a little..." I'd have it snipped and positioned already.

Is that a bad thing that that goes on?
The other option is another take.
One of them is going to happen. Maybe the first take was better emotionally? So now the edited take is the better option. Is that cheating? Is doing a 2nd take cheating. Is erasing or scribbling out a few words and rewriting a line when writing out the lyrics the first time cheating? Or maybe anything beyond a live performance is cheating? Didn't improvise a piece of music perfectly flawlessly on the spot? Cheating...

I think constructing something musical sounding from average or below average players with technology is actually a lot more work than recording someone who can actually play or sing. It usually comes out sounding like the demo song on a Casio keyboard. Cheating... Cheating is supposed to be the easy way out.

What I really wish is that my Pink Floyd heroes would still be able to record something that doesn't make me cringe and reach for the skip button! Dave still sounds amazing on his guitar and his voice is in fine shape.

 

[César]

You can hear autotune warbling through the thick mush of lossy compression that is a youtube video!? All I hear is the sound of mp3 X 1000 that is youtube. As I would expect from... youtube. Think of YT like the new AM radio. It's just fine for what it does.

Perfect tight harmonies? They might have nailed that. Or mostly nailed it and then slip edited the ones that missed a little. By the time the talent said "was that 3rd line a little..." I'd have it snipped and positioned already.

Is that a bad thing that that goes on?
The other option is another take.
One of them is going to happen. Maybe the first take was better emotionally? So now the edited take is the better option. Is that cheating? Is doing a 2nd take cheating. Is erasing or scribbling out a few words and rewriting a line when writing out the lyrics the first time cheating? Or maybe anything beyond a live performance is cheating? Didn't improvise a piece of music perfectly flawlessly on the spot? Cheating...

I think constructing something musical sounding from average or below average players with technology is actually a lot more work than recording someone who can actually play or sing. It usually comes out sounding like the demo song on a Casio keyboard. Cheating... Cheating is supposed to be the easy way out.

What I really wish is that my Pink Floyd heroes would still be able to record something that doesn't make me cringe and reach for the skip button! Dave still sounds amazing on his guitar and his voice is in fine shape.

Jim, don't you like In Any Tongue? It's the closest to the old times Floyd I've heard

 

[César]

Changing topic slightly: Anybody from QQ going to the RAH on Sept 25th?

 

[JediJoker]

So the the fact that it doesn't sound like crap makes it like fingernails on a chalkboard?

It's not that "not sounding like crap" offends my ears, but the unnatural sound of the result does. Unless it's being used as an obvious effect or in an extremely subtle way (this is not), vocal pitch correction has no place on a final mix.

You can hear autotune warbling through the thick mush of lossy compression that is a youtube video!? All I hear is the sound of mp3 X 1000 that is youtube.

Yes, I can. I'm surprised you can't.

Perfect tight harmonies? They might have nailed that. Or mostly nailed it and then slip edited the ones that missed a little. By the time the talent said "was that 3rd line a little..." I'd have it snipped and positioned already.

Yes, they might have, but if they had—or if it had been slip-edited, as you suggest—the end result would not have sounded like this.

Is that a bad thing that that goes on?
The other option is another take.
One of them is going to happen. Maybe the first take was better emotionally? So now the edited take is the better option. Is that cheating? Is doing a 2nd take cheating. Is erasing or scribbling out a few words and rewriting a line when writing out the lyrics the first time cheating? Or maybe anything beyond a live performance is cheating? Didn't improvise a piece of music perfectly flawlessly on the spot? Cheating...

It's not the "cheating" aspect that bothers me. In fact, studio "cheats" don't bother me in the slightest (I use them all the time), as long as they don't create horribly offensive sonic artifacts that clearly weren't intentional, as lazy vocal pitch correction is wont to do. I would say it's a bad thing, because it detracts greatly from my enjoyment of the music. Another take is always preferable to uncanny-valleying the vocals on a final mix. Pro tip: if it's not working naturally, pick a good take, pitch correct it, and have the talent sing along to it on the next take. Assuming they're not tone deaf, they'll try to blend with themselves and render a far less pitchy performance that doesn't need pitch correction. Why more producers/engineers don't take this approach is beyond me. It's a no-brainer.

 

[colsky]

Changing topic slightly: Anybody from QQ going to the RAH on Sept 25th?

I am. Are you?

 

[César]

I am. Are you?

Yes, wife coming with me (she's not a big fan but as I invited her to come...)

 

[zabble]

Pitch correction? There is nothing that bothers me more and a recording than the sound of pitch correction. I don't hear it here,

 

[colsky]

Yes, wife coming with me (she's not a big fan but as I invited her to come...)

I'm going on my own, as my wife's not keen either. She jokingly said that I should stay in a hotel near Albert Hall, as I'm seeing David Gilmour there on 25th, and am then seeing Steven Wilson there too on 28th and 29th! Luckily she hasn't seen how expensive the Gilmour ticket was :spot:.

 

[César]

I'm going on my own, as my wife's not keen either. She jokingly said that I should stay in a hotel near Albert Hall, as I'm seeing David Gilmour there on 25th, and am then seeing Steven Wilson there too on 28th and 29th! Luckily she hasn't seen how expensive the Gilmour ticket was :spot:.

I still didn't tell her that I'm seeing Steven in Madrid this Wednesday and then the screening of The Wall on the 29th. I have to carefully manage the music expense related messages this month, otherwise I may end up in a hotel like you

 

[Clint Eastwood]

I still didn't tell her that I'm seeing Steven in Madrid this Wednesday and then the screening of The Wall on the 29th. I have to carefully manage the music expense related messages this month, otherwise I may end up in a hotel like you

It's always easier to ask for forgiveness...than permission:couch

 

[JediJoker]

Pitch correction? There is nothing that bothers me more and a recording than the sound of pitch correction. I don't hear it here,

Then I envy you.