The X Factor

Because in your example it's better for the "publisher" to edit the offending moment to enhance the experience of the consumer - just as is the point of the auto tune.

Yes, my faith in the integrity of producers of such shows is probably misplaced, but I firmly believe anything done in post production is generally for the benefit of the show and the viewer rather than any individual act. And to put it bluntly - auto-tune or no auto-tune, you can't polish a turd.

I wasn't talking about a customer trying to read the story, I'm talking about a friend of the author trying to understand why it was rejected.

So, I'm talking about a viewer trying to see why the judges made their decision, not the buyer of the single trying to enjoy the song.

Auto-tune wasn't used at an audition it was used in post-production.

As Brekkie states it cannot be used to suddenly transform a lousy artist into something much better. It's use is subtle as this, one of the few reasoned and hyperbole free articles suggests http://routenote.com/blog/auto-tune-x-factor-shocker/

Furthermore nobody votes at the audition stage. There is no suggestion of the use of auto-tune in the live show by the acts, however some of the established artists who have guested on the show are believed to have made use of it.

Really it's no worse than the journalists writing these articles using spell check!

Well, whatever, it was still used.

Hmm - sorry I missed the show "Journalist Spelling Idol"... Must have been on ITV5...

There is a HUGE difference between using a spell checker as a journalist where your core skill is not spelling, and where you aren't voted for week-by-week by the public spending money based on your spelling ability.

X Factor is about finding people with raw talent, introducing them to the public, and watching them grow as people and performers on their "journeys". The audition stages are there to show you the good AND the bad, and viewers are already picking their favourites.

Selective use of Autotune is misleading, and dishonest on a talent show, and allows the producers to manipulate the viewers yet more. It is down-right wrong.

(If you want an analogy, it is like every journalist on a paper being allowed to write an essay without a spellchecker, and then the newspaper editor deciding which journalist's copy to spell check, and then the newspaper buyer being able to pay different amounts for each article they've read, based on the spelling quality...)

Couldn't agree more, and find it really odd to hear anyone arguing for it, given the nature of the programme and the lucrative phone vote at its core.

I'd argue that the audition stages are absolutely key to viewers selecting their favourite; many of whom will, in turn, vote weekly to keep them in the show. I really don't accept the argument that because the viewers don't vote at the auditions stage then it doesn't matter. By the end of the first episode the contestants are virtually overnight celebrities, based on how crazy they are, how dreadful they are - or how brilliant they are.

You can't polish a turd - but you can make someone charming/attractive/telegenic with an ok singing voice sound amazingly good - and an obvious votewinner for the public.

Strikes me as very unstable ground upon which to build a show, whose premise (ostensibly) is to find the most gifted singer in the land.

Well rather than people "arguing for it" I think it's more people arguing that's it's not as big of a deal that the press made.

I do get some of your points, whilst I might not agree with them all. Everyone's own opinion I suppose.

I still don't believe it to have been *exactly* how it was made out.

In last week's episode, the 'sound' of autotune was very noticeable. Almost too much so - as if they wanted it to be noticeable, so as to create this 'storm' that followed. I believe that a conscious decision was made to add this effect to the first show of the series, where maybe it wasn't before (I've certainly never heard anything to suggest it's been used in past series).

Admit it, how many of you went into work or spoke to your friends in the following days - "did you see X Factor - bloody autotuning and all that eh!" and words to that effect. Nobody is in any doubt that the new series has begun now, as everybody has been talking about it.

Curiously, it seems to have not had the effect they possibly intended. Overnights show that this weekend's show is over a million viewers down on last week. Obviously it's a Bank Holiday weekend, which may affect things, but I reckon they've decided to take a gamble as a test of the 'all publicity is good publicity' theory.

I think you might have a point there. But just wanted to add that in all the series , the 2nd Audition show has gone down in ratings terms. This was actually the most watched 2nd Audition show ever. Plus as you say it's a bank holiday on top of that.

I think its only reasonable to point out that the last few to post in defence of autotune (or, at least to point out that its not the pernicious thing that some think) are *proper* fans of the show.

With that in mind its easy to understand why they are playing it down.

I can think of a few other examples of production techniques they could use in order to improve the programme for the audience, while misleading them at the same time - would these also be fair?

- Giving selected (by the producers) people a professional makeover & clothing to wear at the filmed audition along with decent lighting, while others just get plain flat lighting and get to perform in the state they turned up.

- Giving selected people a rehearsal in front of the judges before they film the audition, in order to go through what they want to say to the judges (and their reactions) in order to heighten the emotions (and/or conflict).

- Paying actors to perform to the judges and then staging a fight between them, the judges and the bouncers.



With this being a talent audition, we should be seeing the exact same audition the judges see. By (badly*) adding autotune, we're not, and that affects whether or not we can understand why the judges chose to make the decisions they did.

* When using auto-tune in a live situation, we virtually always have the auto-tune output coming back to a separate desk channel to the clean feed from the mic, and can then mix between that and the adjusted audio until it sounds natural. Used properly, it's only noticable to people looking out for it - used the other week, everyone noticed it. It's also the clean feed from the mic sent to wedges / IEMs so the performers can often do their own auto-tune if they go off track.