Cher "Do you believe" vocal effect

[anti-banausic]

Don't flame, but I can see where there could be a use for this type of vocal effect, but it would again be very specific....

If you cut up a vocal sample, rearranged the syllables, then used something like auto-tune, or in LIVE you can just change the pitch of some of the audio samples then consolidate, but that might be kinda cool....like someone singing jibberish, but melodically?

That way, you could come up with your own melody!>
just a thought.

[munchkin]

I think you need to pass it through a helium VST.

[farlukar]

If you cut up a vocal sample, rearranged the syllables, then used something like auto-tune, or in LIVE you can just change the pitch of some of the audio samples then consolidate, but that might be kinda cool....like someone singing jibberish, but melodically?

Methinks you'd have to do the autotune first, then somehow auto-slice based on frequency, then auto-shuffle... and you'd have to do some pretty well-timed singing
tricky.

[wonshu]

Actually Cher's vocal acrobatics are entirely a function of those tight clothes she wears. Years ago she had the latest acoustically modelled wardrobe designed for her. She can now emulate any wedgie she desires and morph between that elusive knicker elastic up the creek sound and a full frontal boob squashing chest compression sound in anything from 0.4 ms to 1 minute.

G-Force helped design it. (Apparently Fire Sledge had a personal hand in it). Thats why the Minimonsta took so long (took a while to get it out again)

that made my night... g'night
-h

[munchkin]

Actually Cher's vocal acrobatics are entirely a function of those tight clothes she wears. Years ago she had the latest acoustically modelled wardrobe designed for her. She can now emulate any wedgie she desires and morph between that elusive knicker elastic up the creek sound and a full frontal boob squashing chest compression sound in anything from 0.4 ms to 1 minute.

G-Force helped design it. (Apparently Fire Sledge had a personal hand in it). Thats why the Minimonsta took so long (took a while to get it out again)

that made my night... g'night
-h

But is it more authentic than Arturia's Cher plugin?

[Meffy]

Sorry, but you're all wrong.

They took a recording of R2-D2 and ran it through Vocaloid Miriam, then mastered the result using Waves Platinum (because Cher was wearing her long, slightly waved hair bleached at the time).

And that's the true story of how I won WWI.

[Andywanders]

Cosmetic surgery

[Hink]

Don't flame, but I can see where there could be a use for this type of vocal effect, but it would again be very specific....

If you cut up a vocal sample, rearranged the syllables, then used something like auto-tune, or in LIVE you can just change the pitch of some of the audio samples then consolidate, but that might be kinda cool....like someone singing jibberish, but melodically?

That way, you could come up with your own melody!>
just a thought.

no flame...I agree it has a place....it's just that for a while everyone thought everywhere was the place and I got so sick of it it's lost it's appeal imo...

[djanthonyw]

IMHO it is a well produced track, but I think the best use of this effect was on the song by QED - Love Bites (Valentin Club Mix).


Anthony

[BrianEnglish]

Welcome to Kvr fresh101.

The Cher Vocal effect was done using a vocoder- check sound on sound magazine's website, and do a search for Cher+Believe, and you'll see an interview with the engineer...

I can hear some aspects of vocoding on certain parts, but it was clearly done using Auto Tune. Just download a 10 day trial of auto tune yourself and set the retune speed knob to 0:
http://www.antarestech.com/download/demo.html
Or read about it on Antares' website:
http://portal.knowledgebase.net/al/5384 ... =0.9692957


Try recreating the effect with a digitech talker, then try it with AT4 with the retune at 0... auto tune does it extremely fast and no effort. I think people don't want to admit they use auto tune, especially producers of famous songs. Auto Tune is the most commonly used plugin that nobody talks about. Its on almost all pop music these days.

[intel]

Try recreating the effect with a digitech talker, then try it with AT4 with the retune at 0... auto tune does it extremely fast and no effort.

of course this does nothing to account for the fact that the effect is exactly the same each time, whereas with AutoTune one would have to sing precisely out of key in precisely the same way for precisely the same amount of time for each instance. and it does little to account for the fact that Cher is not Brittany Spears or some up-and-coming pop star, but rather a veteran of the field who has had plenty of years without the aid of AutoTune to prove that she's not tone deaf and incapable of carrying a tune (to greater or lesser degrees).

[zircon]

Welcome to Kvr fresh101.

The Cher Vocal effect was done using a vocoder- check sound on sound magazine's website, and do a search for Cher+Believe, and you'll see an interview with the engineer...

I can hear some aspects of vocoding on certain parts, but it was clearly done using Auto Tune. Just download a 10 day trial of auto tune yourself and set the retune speed knob to 0:
http://www.antarestech.com/download/demo.html
Or read about it on Antares' website:
http://portal.knowledgebase.net/al/5384 ... =0.9692957


Try recreating the effect with a digitech talker, then try it with AT4 with the retune at 0... auto tune does it extremely fast and no effort. I think people don't want to admit they use auto tune, especially producers of famous songs. Auto Tune is the most commonly used plugin that nobody talks about. Its on almost all pop music these days.

It had nothing to do with autotune.. read the link I posted earlier, the guy who made the effect explained exactly how he did it.

[LBN]

I'm amazed at how many people insist it is Antares Auto-Tune despite contradiction from the guy who produced the song:

I used a Digitech Talker -- a reasonably new piece of kit that looks like an old guitar foot pedal, which I suspect is what it was originally designed for. You plug your mic straight into it, and it gives you a vocoder-like effect, but with clarity; it almost sounds like you've got the original voice coming out the other end. I used a tone from the Nord Rack as a carrier signal and sequenced the notes the Nord was playing from Cubase to follow Cher's vocal melody. That gave the vocals that 'stepped' quality that you can hear prominently throughout the track -- but only when I shifted the the Nord's notes back a bit. For some reason, if you track the vocal melody exactly, with the same notes and timing, you hardly get get any audible vocoded effect. But I was messing about with the Nord melody sequence in Cubase and shifted all the notes back a fraction with respect to the vocal. Then you really started to hear it, although even then it was a bit hit-and-miss -- I had to experiment with the timing of each of the notes in the Nord melody sequence to get the best effect. You couldn't hear an effect on all the vocals by any means -- and on others it made the words completely impossible to understand!

"In the end, we only used vocoded sections where they had the most striking effect, but didn't make the lyrics unintelligible. To do that, I had to keep the vocoded bits very short. So for example, when Cher sang 'Do you believe in life after love?', I think I only cut the processed vocals into the phrase on just the syllables 'belie-' from 'believe' and 'lo-' from 'love' -- but that was enough to make the whole phrase sound really arresting. I made sure throughout that the last word of each vocal phrase was unprocessed, because again, I found it sounded too bubbly and hard to understand when it was vocoded."

[djanthonyw]

Yea, I do have to agree with you on this...

[unic]

Interesting. So there's much more to achieving such effects than meets the eye - especially not so much to 'auto' and 'automated' procedures.