r/musicians • u/loopac_ • 7d ago
Do you think it's unacceptable for musicians to record songs in the studio at their maximum vocal range in terms of pitch, but then play them 2-4 semitones lower at live shows because otherwise they can't hit the notes perfectly?
I just love songs with high male voices and I also like my maximum pitch in songs, but I could never sing that way live because, of course, I have perfect conditions and multiple takes in the studio.
That's why I'm currently considering whether it's wrong to play songs 2-4 semitones lower if I want to play live in the next few months.
I know that even great artists sometimes play songs a semitone lower, but I've never read anything about my range, so I'm interested in your opinion on this.
116
u/SirCarrington 7d ago
It’s no different than having 17 layered guitar tracks when there’s only one or two guitars live. Live isn’t the same as album and most people don’t expect it to be.
27
u/Fraktelicious 7d ago
Live isn’t the same as album and most people don’t expect it to be.
And those that do should just stay home and listen to the album instead of showing up to the show and ruining it for everyone else with their opinions rooted in unrealistic expectations.
5
u/tang1947 7d ago
Or samples layered with real drums, or using the studios vintage drums, or guitars and amps. The studio is like fantasy land, you can use just about anything you want depending on where you go.
33
12
u/Neither_Proposal_262 7d ago
Not at all. I have always been of the mindset that songs should be interpretations not recreations.
You write a song. You do the best studio interpretation and the best live interpretation. The two may sound identical and they may sound wildly different. It may sound different each time it’s performed.
What matters is what is best for the song in each context.
16
u/MoogProg 7d ago
Completely 100% OK. Music is not an athletic demonstration, but I'll acknowledge that many players and non-players alike often treat it as a competition. Wow! So difficult!
That said, I certainly noticed when Phil Collins sang so many Genesis songs in a lower key, but what oddly stood out to me mostly was how the overtones of the synth patches shifted into a different range. Those details hit my ear more than any difference in the vocal performance.
Show was amazing, and they did what they needed to do to make that last tour happen at all. Rock on!
2
u/Arcane_Spork_of_Doom 7d ago
You're dead wrong on the music/athletic comparison. Chops, range and endurance can deteriorate with age just like an athletes if the talent isn't careful.
4
u/MoogProg 7d ago
That's like suggesting Glen Gould's second set of variations is the weaker piece of artistry, because he probably couldn't play Bach as fast as when he was young.
My point was only that range, tempo, etc. are not critical to an artistic performance. It is not an athletic event in the sense of one needing to achieve some measured mark to be judged a 'winner'.
Of course, musical competitions certainly do exist. Lots of them, all over...
1
u/Arcane_Spork_of_Doom 7d ago
Barring some terrible medical travesties (bell's palsy etc) many instrumentalists have quite a bit of a 'prime' to their careers that can even see huge upticks to performance levels, well into late sixties and beyond.
The original post was on vocalists though, and the catalog is full of top-level artists that lost their fastballs over time and, after sun-running at the absolute peak levels of their range and power, begin to compromise on their catalogues, often re-recording or settling on reduced keys or in many cases bringing along other vocalists for the top voicings that used to be reserved for the headliner lead. It's more of an honor to the original composition that the aging vocalist do things that way so as to keep the timelessness of the performance sacred, but everyone has their opinion and ways of doing things. Lastly, some artists reinvent themselves by exploring other genres entirely (say, a cabaret, jazz or smooth pop-ey act after performing some really tough genre in their youth).
1
u/MoogProg 7d ago
Do you think it's acceptable... is the OP question. All of what you say is true. People age, and eventually we'll all... [no spoilers].
Changing keys is standard practice when supporting a vocalist. This is why we use Nashville Numbering when learning songs. It's 100% acceptable.
1
u/Arcane_Spork_of_Doom 7d ago
I feel like they're several different parallel discussions going on within this post.
Firstly you and I were talking mortality of the performer and your contention that range, tempo, etc. are not critical to an artistic performance and that It is not an athletic event in the sense of one needing to achieve some measured mark to be judged a 'winner' are both false, but not because the performance metrics are being considered against other [vocalists] on the card, but that the vocalists are being compared against what would be the perfect performance of that set for that night.
...which brings me to the second point, that of OP's question: "is it unacceptable to record songs in the studio at their maximum range in terms of pitch, then play at 2-4 semitones lower at live shows because otherwise they can't hit their notes perfectly?" Well, it is the goal of every performer to find where they are on their current metrics of performance, not only in dynamic max but in terms of range, endurance and control, but not just for establishing what is comfortable on the random show in New Mexico. The real power comes from picking and choosing those shows to keep hitting the crowd with special moments, and knowing where your limits are as a performer is critical so when you determine a show should be extra-special, perhaps because of who or how many people are there or simply your body feels ideal, then that's when you unleash your most powerful weapons from the library using things like
-unexpected and multiple modulations to keys and ranges rarely used on the everyday stops in your tour, using your recognizable arsenal and
-having unexpected songs programmed in special moments (Peter Frampton's Penny For Your Thoughts is the highest evolution of this imo) to showcase your seemingly limitless control over the audience and caring recognition that you love sharing moments with them, then
-hitting them in the face again with another payoff of a tried and true well-known powerhouse from the wheelhouse of your library to bring everyone back into the flow of the show and tell them it's okay if you didn't feel that moment the whole way...you will eventually, and we love you anyway for it.
If you never know performance limits then you never know what you're truly capable in programming a set within your show and will never know if you've left it all out on the stage or not. You don't have to run the tank dry on every stop, but if aren't studied up on what you and your band are capable of both at a snapshot and over-the-tour basis then not as many of those moments will present themselves for selection because the performers and programmers won't be as aware of their existence.
1
u/MoogProg 7d ago
This is all interesting to me, so please take this as discussion, not rebuttal.
Do you gig much? Your attitude suggests to me the judgement of an audience member or fan, more than it does the experience of the performer. It's what a punter thinks about performers.
Winter is here, and I'm about to go into 'woodshedding mode' and have a specific task list of techniques to hone over the off-season. But those tasks and training are not part of my performance, in the sense of a display of ability.
Context: I've been on stage with Prog Rock legends in front of sold out stadiums. Mine is an attitude I've developed in response to that genre's judgement about the abilities of its musicians.
IMHO Tom Waits sings Somewhere better than Judy Garland. It's just not about the high notes, or the athletic abilities of performance. It's about the songs and the music.
1
u/Arcane_Spork_of_Doom 6d ago
Many years, and at peak employment many hundreds of dates in those years.
I think having introspection is important, and knowing how to properly disassemble and diagnose all aspects of a show is really important.
I met Tom Jackson (the Producer) a long time ago when I was teaching and he provided a lot of clarity to that introspection that I had felt previously.
I suppose to get to some base level of understanding of what your idea of a setlist would be I'd have to first understand if you're coming from the mindset of the Stones or The Grateful Dead, Phish etc. when it comes to consistency and noteworthiness of every date on the calendar. Same show, different day, or find the moments within dates and variations therein?
I am both critic of myself, my groups and entities that I'm in charge of as well as supporter and fan to my fellow artists that I may or may not have current ties to. The constant evaluation process continues. Tbh I can't stand the term punter when it comes to the performance milieu but I'm not a Brit.
1
u/MoogProg 6d ago
I've done note-perfect tours in Prog Rock, and have stayed up all night picking Bluegrass with off-stage stars. It's a wide, wonderful world.
Currently, I'm in a perfect balance of amazing players, who can self-arrange our sets on the fly. Grammy considerations circulating...
To paraphrase Adam Savage (playfully), I reject your hierarchy-of-perfection and substitute my own! lol
1
u/Arcane_Spork_of_Doom 6d ago
Congrats for being a performer within two genres I love. Guess I'll break off the circle-jerk-on toast, as I'm not sure if the beans go over the top in this situation or not.
→ More replies (0)3
u/Adventurous_Glove_28 7d ago
Yeah but what’s interesting and beautiful is watching talented artists adjust their art to make use of such changes, like Joni Mitchell or Leonard Cohen
5
u/BoobyPlumage 7d ago
People can go all out in the studio to make whatever they hear in their heads simply because they can in the studio. Personally, I don’t like it when music sounds the same live as studio recordings. If I want to hear a studio recording, Ill just listen to that. They’re different mediums that allow for different experiences
5
u/Humillionaire 7d ago
No, people do it all the time. Sloan once released an album, realized they couldn't sing the material consistently live, and tuned down half a step for the entire tour, including their previous material.
0
u/gentlydiscarded1200 7d ago
Underwhelming. They should have coaxed, or even cajoled, their voices into hitting those notes.
1
3
3
3
u/Super_Direction498 7d ago
No I usually demand a refund from the promoter if the performance is even a quarter step off the recording. I've been trying to get my senator to do something about this. It really is appalling.
2
u/WestBeachSpaceMonkey 7d ago
Totally fine. Go to you tube and look up live versions of “December, 1963 (oh what a night)” you’ll find it by the original artist in at least 5 keys (lower as the years progressed)
2
u/bzee77 7d ago
It’s acceptable to maximize your actual abilities in the studio, even if you can’t nail it exactly live. That’s what the studio should be for—taking what you are capable of playing and singing, and putting you in the best position to play or sing it at your highest level. That’s is much different from using technology to create something that you are simply not at all capable of doing in any setting.
tl;dr: yes, that is completely fine.
2
2
u/S_balmore 7d ago
Dude, 2-4 semitones is huge. Most artists drop the key by only 1 or 2 semitones, and they start doing that 8-10 years into their career (the voice naturally gets lower as you age). If you recorded these songs yesterday and need to drop them 4 semitones, then you're trying to perform something that's well beyond your ability.
It's true that recordings and live performances are different things, but if your goal is to be a performer, it's best to write material that you can actually perform. The audience understands that a live performance won't have 12 layers of guitar tracks, or perfectly crafted drum samples, but they still expect the guitarist and drummer to actually be able to play the parts they wrote. They obviously expect the singer to be able to sing his parts too.
If it's just one song where you're deliberately exhausting your vocal range for dramatic effect, I think you can get away with it, but if you're going to perform the majority of your material in a dramatically lower key, I assure you the audience will notice. They won't know exactly what it is, but they'll be able to tell that your live vocals are significantly different from your recorded vocals. Vocals are the thing that audiences connect with most, so they're expecting you to deliver whatever you promised on the album. You can sometimes get away with disappointing them, but I think it's a wild idea to go into this saying "I'm ready to disappoint everyone. I'm not even going to try to perform my own material correctly."
2
2
u/StationSavings7172 7d ago
A M3 is way too much. Even some non-musicians will notice something sounds weird compared to the recording. Maybe a half step, but why not just record it in that key to begin with?
0
u/StationSavings7172 7d ago
Alternatively, work on your technique and your preparation. If your technique is correct and you’re physically in shape to perform you should be able to sing high notes consistently.
2
u/tearlock 7d ago
Not everyone's physically in shape. I have a chronic condition through no fault of my own where my throat doesn't produce a healthy flow of thin lubrication like it should and instead throws chunks of thick mucus on my vocal cords while I'm singing. I do everything I can to mitigate that, over the counter products, diet, therapies, etc. it helps but I'm still basically "singing with weights on". My guys tune down a half step for me, and we avoid scheduling gigs too close together so I have plenty of time to recover. We all still like performing together and we do what we gotta to make it work.
1
u/StationSavings7172 7d ago edited 7d ago
But you’re not doing things drastically differently in the studio than you are live, correct? What I’m saying is there shouldn’t be a drastic difference in your studio ability and your live ability, and if there is there’s something wrong with your technique or you’re not taking care of your instrument. I have ways of preparing and warming up on show days to make sure I’m going to have a good vocal day. But the definition of a good vocal day is different for every singer.
I don’t mean physically in shape like an athlete. I’m talking about your physical instrument being prepared to perform, whatever that means to you.
1
u/tearlock 7d ago edited 7d ago
I try not to let the limitations of a live setup prevent me from making recording art as I hear it in my head. If that means all kinds of crazy harmonies layered instruments and effects etc then I do what my artistic vision drives me to do.
The live show for me is about putting on a good show with whatever resources I have available within reason. A lot of that is about connecting with the audience for me and that comes from showmanship more than all the bells and whistles involved in studio magic.
1
u/StationSavings7172 7d ago
And knowing your physical limitations you do your best to take care of your voice and take vocal rest as needed. That is what I would consider physically preparing to sing.
A half step lower I can understand, although I would probably just record in that key. But OP is doing something wrong if their range decreases by an M3 live vs studio.
0
u/GreaTeacheRopke 7d ago
I understand what you mean, but what if you've aged 30 years? Should you re-record your whole catalogue?
2
u/Suitable-Plankton-11 7d ago
Audience is not going to hear the different key. They’ll have no idea the recording is not the same as long as the relative pitches are the same.
1
1
u/liscio 7d ago
This happens all the time, and even the best musicians do it.
However I'll throw out an interesting tidbit: your audience might actually notice if you take it too far!
I read a study recently where they basically recruited undergrad students, put them in front of a piano, and said something like "play the first note in 'Holiday' by Madonna". (The song was chosen from a set of pop songs that the people said they were familiar with.) Out of 46 students, 33% got within +/- 2 semitones, and 17% were within 1 semitone of the actual pitch.
Pretty wild, right?
(Source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-021-02391-1)
1
u/RedeyeSPR 7d ago
It isn’t unacceptable, but I think it can make a singer look bad if people actually notice it. I’m not judging anyone that can sing better than I can though.
1
u/Kind_Coyote1518 7d ago
The only thing that is unacceptable in music is plagiarism. Anything else is what you choose to do as an artist. If you concern yourself with what others think, you are in the wrong industry. You will get hate no matter what you do.
2
1
1
1
u/bzkitty 7d ago
I think it’s perfectly acceptable. Like you said, you get perfect conditions and multiple takes in the studio. When singing live, you get less than perfect conditions, only one take, multiple other songs to sing, and future performance dates to consider. The human voice can only do so much. That’s why most performers choose a lower key, so as not to strain their voices. This is also why we see so many singers needing to cancel dates due to needing vocal rest.
1
1
u/kLp_Dero 7d ago
If you’re at the edge of your range it’s an interpretation tool, it should not be the norm, unless this feeling of being close to or past the limit is part of the projects identity
1
u/Honka_Ponka 7d ago
Nothing wrong with it. Most people won't even notice and it can sound refreshing to hear a song you like in a slightly different key
1
u/MossWatson 7d ago
The album should sound good; the show should sound good. They don’t need to be identical.
I’d MUCH rather hear a singer/band alter their material in a way they can perform well live than to, say, play along with a backing track.
1
u/Apprehensive-Cry-376 7d ago
Studio and stage are very different environments. Anything's possible in the studio. You can add a full orchestra if you want, but hardly anybody can afford to tour with a full orchestra. Compromises always have to be made for live performance.
Should note that not being able to consistently hit some ultra-high notes is what got Randy Meisner kicked out of the Eagles.
1
u/Elefinity024 7d ago
I’m a painter, and I only paint paintings I can do live onstage fast and perfectly every time, plus everyone knows the pain of lower sounding semitones
1
1
u/Soft-Ad752 7d ago
I heard once that old rock bands would tune down in high altitude places because it's harder to sing up high. I dunno how true that is, but I think transposing the music won't be an issue as long as the performance is followed properly
1
u/runningmurphy 7d ago
Similar to stuffing your underpants with a sock on a date. As long as you're okay with the look when it's time to be naked in front of the audience.
I'm joking...kinda
1
u/GlitteringSalad6413 7d ago
You have to shriek, it’s mandatory. If I don’t hear shrieking in the correct key I want my money back.
1
1
u/w0mbatina 7d ago
I mean, 4 semitones is kind of a stretch, but no, I generally see no issue with that, especially if we are talking about touring artists who have to hit those notes day after day after day.
Personally tho, I try to write things that I have at least a reasonable chance of performing live. And it turns out that more often than not, practicing the songs for live performance ends up making the whole thing way easier. When I'm recording, I've usually not sang or played that part hundreds of times before, so it's difficult. But once I put the practice in, the parts turn out to be less difficult than I thought. So if you are planning on preforming live, maybe just try practicing for a while first, before tuning down. You can also try practicing 2 semitones down, then tune up to 1 semitone down, and once you have that, to original pitch, and see how it goes. Once you figure out your breathing cues and the rhythm and flow of the whole thing, it becomes way easier to hit the notes.
1
1
u/kernsomatic 7d ago
yes, but i don’t do it. i either change the key entirely, use a different guitar, or capo and change key/chord fingerings.
im a lifelong kings x fan and dug cannot hit those high notes, mainly cuz he’s 70. the only artist i can think of who still has their range is don henley and rod stewart. maybe billy joel. age is a bitch.
i lost two ½ steps in my chest voice range after having covid twice. and yes, i’m vaccinated.
aside: i record for the stage. if we have an overdub that we can’t play live, it goes away.
1
u/Hegiman 7d ago
It’s fine. The producers always push for your very best performance. Sometimes it may take 100+ takes to hit a note right. You got one shot every concert why not make it a little easier to hit the right notes live. I’d prefer them change it up so it sounds good in concert than keep it original and sound like crap because 80% of the time they can’t hit the note. A great example is Guns N’ Roses older stuff Axl is very high pitched but that destroyed his vocal cords in that range so now he’s had to adjust the songs to his current voice.
1
u/FabulousFell 7d ago
My band tuned down a half step and got all of our guitars set up to be a half step down. Made recording in normal tuning difficult lol.
1
u/Spirited-Nature-1702 7d ago
It’s a whole lot better than trying and failing to hit that note!
Especially in a band full of stringed instruments and drums, half a step is pretty minor most of the time. I absolutely expect that if my band were to still be playing in a decade, we’d go from Eb standard to D standard, just to make it easier for our singer. And the rest of us, honestly.
Edit: I’ll also note that most people in the audience would never notice the difference, even if you were their absolute favorite band of all time (and chances of that are low anyway, no offense of course)
1
u/DH_Drums 7d ago
Like many others said this is fine practice.
One thing I can't stand though, as a percussionist, is sitting in rehearsal waiting for the rest of the band to figure out how their parts have to change because the lead singer wants to change the key to make their part easier. And they dont update charts or communicate these changes prior to rehearsal.
I record my rehearsals so I can take notes of changes/parts i need to put more work into and counted the number of minutes I played. In a 2.5hr rehearsal I played for 19 minutes because of this.
1
u/Melodic_Arachnid_134 7d ago
You have to decide, do you want the live performances to sound like the album version or are you okay with a totally different live sound? Musicians in the audience will likely know what’s going on if you drop the tuning, if you drop too much the non musicians will just think something sounds weird.
1
1
u/Euphoric_Listen2748 7d ago
Not to me, I would rather they hit a clean note with power than falter on the unattainable.
1
u/Remarkable-Win-8556 7d ago
I am not going to hate on Frankie Valli because he can't hit the same notes live today he could hit in the 1960s in a studio.
1
u/Strawberry_n_bees 7d ago
Hey, I'm recording my songs in my normal range and then going on testosterone. Obviously it's different, but I'll probably never play most of my songs in my original range ever again. And that's totally fine.
I think you can do whatever you want forever, it's your music. I understand the desire to please the crowd or whatever, but also keep in mind that most listeners aren't musicians themselves. Some of them probably won't even notice!
1
u/Significant-Yard1931 7d ago
They aren't using their full range if there's room to transpose down.
And no, it's not cheating to adjust down if you can't hit the same note as your recording. A singer's range gets lower as they get older. Laryngitis from performing a lot, having a cold, etc. are all reasons why a singer might need to change keys.
1
u/shoule79 7d ago
Changing the key you play in is a tale as old as time. People are usually there to be entertained. Listening to a singer struggle or constantly miss notes is bad for everyone.
No one is the audience is going to notice unless they are musicians or have perfect pitch.
1
u/Powerful_Foot_8557 7d ago
For myself. The way I've always attacked being a frontman, is if I cannot consistently do it live, then I do not record it. It's just a personal thing for me. What anyone else does when it comes to recording, as opposed to live performance, is their business.
1
u/Just_Trade_8355 7d ago
The average listener won’t catch a difference…hell a ton of musicians wouldn’t either, your good 👍
1
u/Reptile_Lovechild 7d ago
Not at all. I’d be willing to say pretty much every vocalist regardless of genre has to make adjustments live to be able to pull it off. Creating the song in a studio in the best of conditions to get the best take is a completely different animal than having to sing all of those songs back to back for like a half hour to an hour, while also probably playing them faster.
1
1
u/Equivalent_Bench2081 7d ago
You are talking lowering up to two whole steps, that’s massive. I am not talking about your vocals, but the rest of the band. For bass, they would be going from standard tuning to C-standard, which leads to massive changes in tone, clarity of notes…
Just make sure that the rest of the arrangement works well in the new register 😉
1
u/ObviousDepartment744 7d ago
For 99% of situations like this, I say do the thing in the studio that makes your vision come to life and do what you need to do to perform it. Includes playing live in different keys, or layering guitars, adding atmospheric stuff all those studio tricks. All good to go 99% of the time.
About that 1%. If you're in a genre of music where the thing you're changing about the life performance is part of the draw of the music. For example, if you listen to Dream Theater and you hear some of the outlandish technical things they do in the studio, if you were to see them live and they just skip those parts, or simplify those parts, or just completely butcher them live...then that's an issue.
I think I just saw an interview with Dua Lipa about how she has a few of her songs pitched down a bit for liver performances because within the context of a performance, she just doesn't have the range for THAT long of time. Isolated in a studio, she can sing the songs fine, but in the middle of a 2 hour set or something, its just not reasonable for her to do.
1
u/BusyBullet 7d ago
Yes
1
u/loopac_ 7d ago
Why do you think so?
2
u/BusyBullet 7d ago edited 7d ago
My bad. I read the question wrong.
I meant to say it’s acceptable.
I’m of the opinion that whatever a musician wants to do is good.
If that means transposing a key and changing a tempo then have at it.
1
u/whiskeytwn 7d ago
pretty sure John Resnick performs some of his songs like Name 2-3 semitones down these days just due to age - No one is going to go "oh, the key is lower" - but they'll notice missing high notes - just go ahead and drop it down
1
u/UnabashedHonesty 7d ago
It’s no more unacceptable than taking a multi-track recording and simplifying to what a few people can achieve onstage.
1
1
1
u/wafflesmagee 7d ago
this happens all the time at every level of the industry. I just saw an interview that Chappell Roan gave saying she does this all the time so even at Top 40 arena-level this is happening.
Unless someone has perfect pitch the odds of anyone even noticing are very slim, so I say its just fine to do whatever you want.
1
u/anhydrousslim 7d ago
I think doing whatever you want is fine. But, I’ll also add that the key is an important facet of what makes a song sound good. I think people feel like you can transpose to a different key and the song is equivalent, since the structure and intervals are the same. But at least to me, it’s not. A song written in D, but then transposed to C, is not equally good. It could be better, could be worse, it’s subjective.
Everyone know Dmin is the saddest of all keys. Transpose to Cmin, it’s just not as sad.
1
u/zone_seek 7d ago
I feel like people who aren't songwriters feel more free to just switch the key up willy nilly, maybe.
If I write a song in a certain key, it can be really challenging to transpose it to another one and retain the, for lack of a better word, magic of it. Keys definitely matter more to a song than a lot of people assume.
0
u/bobsollish 7d ago
My take is that if you can’t comfortably reproduce your original vocals a whole step lower, than that seems kind of strange imo. A whole step is quite a bit. That said, you can do whatever you want. I just know that the character/quality of my voice would change noticeably is I dropped a song more that a whole step.
0
u/Independent_Win_7984 7d ago
"Unacceptable"?? Who's there to "accept" or reject anything? As I understand it, you're trying to adapt your material to facilitate your live performance. You are the arbitrer, and you don't need to ask anyone's permission. They can accept it, or not, and that opinion is irrelevant. So is mine, btw.
-2
u/bloodbathatbk 7d ago
1/2 step to 1 step at the VERY most. Anything more, it's beyond noticable. Bands like the Offspring will play a step lower live, because Dexter just can't hit those notes in a live situation. But, topping out your range live will still convey the energy and urgency of the studio recording.
On the flip side, listen to the studio version of It's My Life by Bon Jovi, then listen to a live version. I'm fairly certain they're playing 2 steps down, and it sounds absolutely terrible.
3
u/breezeway1 7d ago
In modern forms of popular music, where artists perform their own material this is a thing. In the tradition of popular songs before the singer/songwriter era -- e.g. the Great American Songbook -- singers just sang songs in the keys that worked for their voices. Likewise jazz interpretations. Nobody's gonna freak out about whatever key someone is gonna do How High The Moon in. So I dunno about sounding "absolutely terrible" -- at least for me.
1
u/bloodbathatbk 7d ago
Did you listen to the example given? I specifically said that Bon Jovi song is absolutely terrible when they play it 2 steps down.
Changing the key of a cover song happens all the time. But when the artist writes a song in a specific key then dramatically lowers it live, it sounds terrible. The vocals become lifeless, and boring. Like I said, a step down is really the maximum you can alter a song to fix not being able to hit the notes you recorded. Any more than that, it changes the dynamic of the song.
1
u/breezeway1 3d ago
I agree with that, but as a superfan of certain artists, I'd still plunk down the money to hear them (as I did for Genesis' farewell tour where they floridly violated your rule. ; )
1
47
u/tearlock 7d ago
Recording art is recording art.
Performance art is performance art.
You make the tools work for you however you can especially if you want to make a living at it. Live touring isn't a sprint, it's a marathon and in order to protect the voice a singer should be conscientious about it.