Talk:Pitch correction

Merge

Further information: Talk:Pitch shift § Pitch correction merge

Yes, I agree with whoever applied the "merge" suggestion: This article should be merged into Pitch shift. They're basically the same thing, and combining these articles would make a great article. (Pitch correction being one specific application of pitch shift, should be a section of the resulting article.) --mcld 10:55, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. While pitch shifting and pitch correction both affect the pitch of an audio signal, they are two completely separate effects used for totally different purposes. --Kaivosukeltaja 08:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I concur with Kaivosukeltaja. I also have some thoughts on the differences between Auto-Tune, pitch correction, and the Cher effect. I think laypersons searching for information on this are more likely to look up Auto-Tune... and while some of the issues affecting auto-tune can apply to pitch correction in general, the fact that Auto-tune was the first real time scale-based pitch correction technology brought the problem to a whole new level... so I think it is legitimate for a lot of the discussion on the "ethics" and artistic merits on Auto-Tune to remain in the Auto-Tune article, because although some of them might also apply to all pitch correction, these didn't really become such large issues until the advent of Auto-Tune. On the other hand, I think the Cher effect is just one specific artistic use of Auto-Tune pitch-correction, and probably should not be a separate article. --Epictetus (talk) 13:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. Pitch shifting is typically used by musicians when they create the music. Pitch correction it typically used in the mix-down process of recording to correct out of tune notes or performances. Robert.Harker (talk) 22:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

X Factor (UK)

There was a minor scandal recently when the first episode of a new series of X Factor featured pitch corrected performances - in one case, the female half of a duo was pitch corrected, while the male half wasn't to emphasise the difference in the quality of their vocal control. It made the news, and the producers have subsequently sworn off autotune, while claiming they only did it because of the amount of audience noise, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.244.95.216 (talk) 11:31, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

The Cher Effect was only popularised, not developed by Cher

While I know for a fact that I herd this effect being used LONG before Cher got her paws on it, I can't for the life of me remember the band/song I heard this on originally (as early as mid 90s by my estimate). I have however found this New Yorker article that has statements such as "The first popular example of Auto-Tune’s distorting effect was Cher’s 1998 hit "Believe" and "Before "Believe", Auto-Tune was a closely held producers’ secret." which indicate that while she popularised the effect, she didn't pioneer it. Should there be some mention of that in the article? MrZoolook (talk) 05:02, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

history of pitch correction

the first statement in the main part of the article is not true..pitch correction has been used in the studio since at least the early 1960`s..Fabian used it and testified in court that he used it during the payola scandals..it is in the Wikipedia article about him and has been common knowledge for years..even in the days of 78 rpm records engineers would speed up the recordings to alter the pitch..this is nothing new --Lonepilgrim007 (talk) 01:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

The Fabian case was not about pitch correction. It was about undisclosed "doctoring" of the voice, mostly by cutting out bad takes on tape and splicing in good takes.

Changing the speed on a 78 rpm disc (or any other disc, or tape) is not pitch correction, either; it's bringing the pitch up or down. The new pitch will still have the artist's performance variations. Binksternet (talk) 02:17, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

References