@blemonge Has music lost something if it needs electronic effects of any kind? What about amplification? What about anything that happens in post-production? How can you distinguish autotune effects from any other, morally speaking? How is it any more of a gimmick than any other?
Lady Gaga still sings the songs and puts meaning into the words and performs. If a machine gives her some pitch changes, that’s part of the music as much as any other digitally or analogally driven electronic change to the sound.
I think there is an underlying issue of class here. Traditionally, musicians were up on the stage and they had practiced for years and they could control their instruments better than anyone else. As such, they were different from ordinary people who supposedly had no musical talent.
But the autotune makes it seem like anyone can sing if they just have autotune to correct their pitch. It makes singing seem like less of a challenge.
I assure you that autotune does nothing of the sort. You still need to have years of practice to do this. You can’t just hop up on the stage and turn on the autotune and the karaoke machine and become an instant star.
You don’t even need to have a voice that stays perfectly on pitch. It’s just a style. Plenty of musicians have become stars with voices that wobble all over the place. Or other instruments that wobble.
I have no problem with you suggesting these musicians have no soul and talent, but it isn’t autotune that is causing that. You have a legitimate complaint about stars pandering to a market you don’t respect. Music has always been about image as well as musical talent. It has always included dance as a way of selling the music. The only time music is purely music is in a recording. And recordings aren’t very faithful to the real thing, no matter how good the technology is, are they?