define the "Cher effect" ?

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 12:03:32 GMT, "Ricky W. Hunt"
<rhunt22@hotmail.com> wrote:

>Here's the article in full:
>
>http/www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb99/articles/tracks661.htm?session=9f8e95c22b1074b9a0cd81bb7c107528
>
>FWIW I've heard people say he tells the story different every time (changing
>what it actually was that did the effect) though it's pretty irrelevant as
>it could be done a number of different ways.

So many ways to make a nasty sound. So few to make a good one 🙂

CubaseFAQ www.laurencepayne.co.uk/CubaseFAQ.htm
"Possibly the world's least impressive web site": George Perfect

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Your memory is correct, it was described in an article in Sound on Sound.

regards,

Sytze



http/www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb99/articles/tracks661.htm?session=9ef580ee9cf950081557197e0ec155da




"Mike Rivers" <mrivers@d-and-d.com> schreef in bericht
news:znr1105963726k@trad...
>
> In article <41eb2a32@clear.net.nz> nacnud@paradise.net.nz writes:
>
> > Autotune is 100% wet, so its not the mix.....
> >
> > the Cher effect is created when the retune rate is set to zero, thus
> > "quantising' the pitch instantly.
>
> That's sure what it sounds like, and that was the speculation when the
> record came out, but I recall reading an article with an interview
> with the the engineer or producer who described how they did the
> "Believe" vocal. It didn't involve AutoTune. There may have been
> AutoTime applied to get it in tune (don't they do that routinely now?)
> but the effect was done with something else, which of course I don't
> remember.
>
>
> --
> I'm really Mike Rivers (mrivers@d-and-d.com)
> However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
> lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
> you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
> and reach me here: double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 17 Jan 2005 20:24:45 -0800, midicad2001@yahoo.com wrote:

>Cher's "jugs" were not originally all that mammoth. And still aren't. <snip>

True, they were originally skeeter bites, then swelled up, then
deflated. Maybe they have Schrader valves on them.

dB

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

<midicad2001@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1106022285.647504.10020@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Cher's "jugs" were not originally all that mammoth. And still aren't.

At least they stop her looking too anorexic around the waist....

geoff

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

DeserTBoB wrote:

> -Dump short Italian after he's served his purpose, get a heroin and
> alcohol addicted three-finger Hammond player instead.

Don't be dis'n Greg. He's done well with those three fingers, and even
better with his voice. And besides all that, he's Duane's brother.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

I have no direct knowledge of this -- but I was at an advanced sound
reinforcement seminar where the guy teaching it claimed to have run sound for
Cher. He says that she had a member of the band playing "keyboards" that fed
MIDI into a pitch corrector box in real time to fix her pitch as she sang live.

-lee-