Aus den sieben Tagen

I understand that people have strong opinions about autotune, but I think we should all take a step back for a moment and consider the arguments both for and against the use of this controversial pitch-correction technology.

It is commonly understood that both sides of the argument hang their theses on four main tenets. Let's first look at the negatives. Critics of autotune maintain that the use (or perhaps merely the overuse) of autotune diminishes the authenticity of the music, specifically the vocals, erasing the human imperfections in the voice that so often endear us to our favorite songs. Autotune sucks all the emotion out, leaving us a clinical rendering of the music. Secondly, the technology has a tendency to eliminate individuality in vocals, removing any distinctiveness from the voice so that the songs all end up sounding the same. Furthermore, reliance on autotune makes singers lazy. They don't have to work at improving and perfecting their craft if they can just take the vocal track and run it through some tech to get the sounds they want. Finally, autotune is, in the end, a studio technology, so what happens when an artist sings live? What the fans end up hearing at a concert might not sound anything like the music they've come to love. This can cause confusion, disappointment, and blind rage, if left unchecked.

On the other side of the aisle are the purveyors and users of autotune, and they are as vehement in defense of the tech as their opponents are critical of it. Supporters of autotune argue that pitch correction is necessary for some artists who struggle with perfect pitch. They might be great singers with excellent vocal interpretations; they just need a little help with their pitch. Secondly, autotune is nothing more than a tool, something the artist can use--like any other tool at his command--as little or as much as he wants. It's up to the artist how best to employ this tech to further his musical expression. Furthermore, it is abundantly clear that the music business is, indeed, a business, where time is money and where deadlines must be strictly adhered to. Autotune can efficiently weed out any pitch problems, saving both time and money in the studio. Finally, autotune levels the playing field. In this day and age where everyone gets a gold star just for trying, it's important that no-talent assclown "musicians" get an equal seat at the table. Everyone is happy. Except for the haters. Nothing ever pleases them. Sheesh.

Taking both sides of the argument into account, let's now turn our attention to one glorious (egregious?) example of autotune, and how it thrust the tech into the spotlight for all to marvel (cringe?) at. I am, of course, referring to Cher's turn-of-the-century classic dance anthem,. This song is the lead single from the legendary diva's 22nd album, which might explain why autotune was used. Cher's choice to use autotune so deliberately and boldly set the standard for the tech's stylistic use even to the modern day. As if Cher wasn't already iconic enough, this track cemented her status, netting her a Grammy for "Best Dance Recording". That robotic, triumphant chorus, supported by blatant and shameless autotune, will make even the most jaded hater throw his arms up in the air--half a measure before he knows what's about to hit--and let loose with "Do you believe in life after love?" Infected by the beat and the EDM goodness, the listener forgets that he just wasted an entire afternoon listening to Stockhausen. Wrapping himself up in the massive commercial success of this song, the listener basks in the reflected glory of Cher, and when he sees how well-liked "Believe" is in Germany, he finds it in his swelling heart the grace to forgive that country for spawning such a pretentious shitstain as Stockhausen.

In conclusion, when you find yourself turning this 5-hour-and-43-minute album off early, I invite you to queue up the timeless "Believe" by Cher and take comfort in the fact that Stockhausen has returned to Sirius and cannot hurt us anymore.