# Situation, how would you handle this?



## Studio E (May 14, 2011)

Hi everyone. I was recently hired to produce a pop song to represent our hometown free street festival. I, with a writing partner, wrote the entire song in my home studio. Here is a link to the song: 

http://soundcloud.com/studio-e/into-the ... rangeville

It went like this. The event coordinator in charge of the festival hired a local video production company and that company, who I've done work for in the past, hired me to write this song. We were given very vague guidelines but it started us in a direction. I worked closely with the production company to ensure that things were going ok. There were a few corrections in direction made along the way but overall, it wen't fairly smoothly. 

At first, I scouted the vocal talent I wanted and got them approved for the song by the event coordinator. I spent hundreds of dollars and two sessions to get the best takes I could. When I started mixing, I just didn't like it. I ran another session with two different singers, mixed it up, and loved it. So did the video production company. Unfortunately, when the event coordinator heard the tracks, she hated the singers. Not only did she not like them, she insisted that we re-track the original singers that hadn't worked out. 

So, after some back-and-forth, all the time, communicating with the video production company in between us (a real pain in the ass), I agreed to re-track the original talent. I brought in my writing partner who is an actual singer ( I am not) to coach the talent. He beat them up a bit during the session but he did it. The tracks were WAY better than before. Not like I had Pink or Christina in the studio but WAY better than before. 

So then I spend literally weeks doing fine-tuned pitch correction, editing, mixing, effects, polishing and more polishing. I get it to where I'm ready to present it and send the finished product up the chain. THe next day, the news comes back that ALL is good. It's approved from top to bottom. Everyone is happy. I get paid, ahhhhh.....

In the mean time, I get an interview from a newspaper about writing and producing the song and it gets printed. I'm all excited. It's local but it's still cool. Everyone is congratulating me for it and my picture and pictures of my studio are in the paper. It all seems really great.

Then, about 10 days after the press conference where they played the new theme and all that, I get a call from the video production company. He tells me that the event coordinator has decided that there are a few pitch issues with the talent (the talent that I said wasn't working remember). Now the event coordinator wants me to produce individual vocal stems for another producer to work with. She never asked if I could take care of it, she just wants me to hand over these stems so someone else can do it.

So now my pride and ego are getting in the way. At first, although annoyed, I wasn't really offended, but now I think I pretty much am. Although I initially told the the video producer that I'd get them for him (and I did get him one), now I'm not sure that I want to do this.

I have mulled this over and over in my head and with a few other people. The thing is, I'd be willing to make specific corrections to the tracks if they want to tell me what they want, but I DON'T want for someone else to get my stems that I recorded and edited so that he can do whatever he thinks is appropriate and then remix them himself. Especially after I got all this attention for doing this song. I mean, he could really F it up and I know who the guy is and believe me, it's amateur hour at his place.

There was never a contract between us and I wasn't going to make a big deal out of it. I just figured, I'll write and produce this song and they will have exclusive license to use it for as long as they want. But I will still own the song. As I see it, this puts me at an advantage in this situation. I should also mention that they aren't asking me to produce these stems for free. They are willing to pay me for my time so pay isn't my point. I would make the adjustment for free (included into the original fee) but I just don't feel that I should have to break the song down into stems for someone else to mess up as part of the deal. 

Opinions? please?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 14, 2011)

What happens if you say say no? The song is finished and that's that.


----------



## germancomponist (May 14, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat May 14 said:


> What happens if you say say no? The song is finished and that's that.



+1


----------



## Studio E (May 14, 2011)

Thanks guys. I feel the same way and yet, it's hard to easily come to that conclusion when I feel that my customer isn't satisfied. I just needed a bit of back-up :wink: 

I know that it's not the standard thing that we listen to around here but, if you get a chance, could you tell me if anything stands out to you as being "pitchy" about the vocal? Especially the female as that was the initial one that she wanted redone. Thanks.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 14, 2011)

You did a great job with this track. Very well done. 8) 

The female vocal does bug me. It's hard to put my finger on, but there's this feeling throughout that the pitch isn't quite on. Not horrible, but I could see a client thinking it could be better.

Since they did pay you and since they seem to be cool about compensating you for your time to make stems, I'd do it. To not do so might seem a little diva-ish, and worse, implies you think the vocals are already perfect and shouldn't be altered.

My ego would hate this, too, by the way. But I think that giving them what they want is the right thing to do.


----------



## midphase (May 14, 2011)

Reading the title of this thread, I thought he was asking specifically of what would Jersey Shore's The Situation do in this particular case.

I think he would smear on some bronzer and spray a few ounces of Armani Pour Homme on the problem!


----------



## midphase (May 14, 2011)

WWTSD?


----------



## Hannes_F (May 15, 2011)

Studio E @ Sat May 14 said:


> I know that it's not the standard thing that we listen to around here but, if you get a chance, could you tell me if anything stands out to you as being "pitchy" about the vocal? Especially the female as that was the initial one that she wanted redone. Thanks.



Hi there,

I like the song, the structure and the overall production. Good work!

Since you asked: For me the female is pitchy all throughout the song. Begins with the first 'come on' ('come' is a tad too low, 'on' considerable too low) and continues from there. There are obvious passages that bite like the octaves at 0:28 and others are better but overall there is much uncertainity. Unfortunate material to work with certainly, and I wonder why they insisted in her. Probably the looks or something else.

I can see why somebody in charge assumes that the producer probably did not hear that and thinks it could save the cue to hand it over to somebody else. That sounds unfair but understandeable if he does not know the story.

PS.: Tuning problems often jump out much more on laptop speakers than on monitors because the ear candy in the studio distracts the ears. Maybe the video producer was the first one to listen on the laptop?


----------



## TheUnfinished (May 15, 2011)

Hmm... So, you were right about her wayward vocals, they ignored you till too late, and are now asking someone else to fix it? That sounds very much to me like somebody somewhere is telling someone else that the whole thing's your fault. I can't see another reason to give the stems to another producer.

Be very careful here, I think you might be being made a scapegoat for this issue behind your back.

Matt


----------



## Studio E (May 15, 2011)

Thanks guys for the help. I know that this might sound crazy, but I'm pretty much prepared to throw a lit match over my shoulder and move on. I am going to offer once more to make specific corrections that they outline and that's it. If they want more than that, too bad. I'm just sick of it. On a side note, I realize now that my own sense of pitch isn't that great and that I am going to have to hire someone else to sit in here and proof my pitch corrections next time I do such a project. THanks again guys!

E


----------



## NYC Composer (May 15, 2011)

Studio E @ Sun May 15 said:


> Thanks guys for the help. I know that this might sound crazy, but I'm pretty much prepared to throw a lit match over my shoulder and move on. I am going to offer once more to make specific corrections that they outline and that's it. If they want more than that, too bad. I'm just sick of it. On a side note, I realize now that my own sense of pitch isn't that great and that I am going to have to hire someone else to sit in here and proof my pitch corrections next time I do such a project. THanks again guys!
> 
> E



My opinion would be to try to gently persuade them to allow you to make your own corrections, reminding them that this has been a long process with a lot of various input. I'd do what I could to salvage the relationship before blowing it up. Relationships are important in this business and you never know when one may lead you into another.

I always considered it a 'win' when I turned an obnoxious or difficult client into a fan who trusted me and kept coming back for future projects. To me, that's always the goal. If it can't be, it can't be, but I'd work it until I was convinced of that. Good luck!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 15, 2011)

Bottom line, what you really want to communicate - however diplomatically you choose the words - is that they are destined to polish turds forever; you told them right away that the problem was the singers, and they are paying the price for not listening to you.

And to be really brutal, with lots of prefaces - like it's easy for me to say this from thousands of miles away (I think?)...and it's a mistake I've made myself and will probably make again...etc.... but you're paying the price for not listening to yourself too.

My guess is that the error you made occurred weeks ago when you allowed them to bully you into hiring the original singers again even though you knew better and told them they were wrong. At the very least you might have been able to hire a third set of singers.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 15, 2011)

I ddn't mention this before, but I like the girl's voice. I can see why they wanted to use her, because she does have a good tone for this type of song. It's just that she does have pitch issues.

This song seems to me to be the perfect time for Melodyne. It sounds very natural (as opposed to Autotune) and is so fast and easy to use to use. I'd buy it just for this one song. Believe me, you'll use it later. If money's an issue, you can get away with the cheapest version of it (which only does one track,) for this song.

As far as your situation with them goes, I don't think they're trying to make you a scapegoat. The song sounds really good, so you've already got their respect for doing a great job. My guess is that they know they pushed a problematic singer on you and are afraid/embarrassed/intimidated to ask too much more from you. So they're trying to be nice and offer to have someone else correct their error so that you don't have to go through any more hassle with this. I've had very similar things happen to me for this very reason.


----------



## wst3 (May 15, 2011)

Nick has identified the problem well... although we all do it time and again, because the problem shows up in so many different costumes.

My most recent - a VERY talented singer/songwriter wanted to cut a demo CD to show off her songs... or so she said. In that situation I usually do the arrangements, play the parts I can, and bring in the big guns for the parts I can't. And that was the plan.

I roughed up a couple of arrangements using VIs and played them for her. She freaked. Not at all what she wanted.

I'm usually pretty adept at getting to the bottom of that issue, but I missed it entirely this time. She sounds like a folk singer, not a rocker. But of course what she wants is to sound like a modern rocker.

And this is where I really blew it. I went back and revised to mockups to sound like some of here reference bands. I got pretty close, she loved them. She cut the vocals. Pure garbage, she just is not a rocker. She might be, when she gets a little older and works on it a bit. But not now.

So she is upset, I am upset, everyone is upset. If I had asked the right questions before we started I would have known that it was a non-starter.

What you do when you reach that point, which seems to be where the OP is, depends on so many factors, not the least of which is your relationship with the person that is complaining, and your general patience level.

If it were me I would (based on what I've read) agree to fix the pitch problems as best I can, with the caveat that we are polishing turds. I'd offer an alternative of recording a better vocalist, but sounds like they won't go for that.

I would not release the stems because I'm already wearing the scapegoat hat, and I'm not going to make it worse. At that point I'll take the temporary hit on my reputation to avoid potentially longer term pain and suffering.

And I'd try to learn from this, but you know, we're in a creative field, and even the best communicator can miss things, and most of us tend to be optimistic, and when we see an obstacle we think we can cross it. So learn what you can, and make an escape plan that preserves your sanity, your ego, and as much of your reputation as possible.

Good luck!!!!

PS- I enjoyed the piece, the writing, arranging, and production are all quite good. The female vocal is flat and pitchy, never a good combination. You probably can fix it with one or more of the available auto-tune tools, but I think the errors are great enough that you will hear artifacts. I don't use auto-tune often enough to give you any suggestions on that I'm afraid.


----------



## José Herring (May 15, 2011)

I agree with Mike. I would add that you should just offer to make any additional changes. I wouldn't take what's happening personally. That would be unprofessional. I would take the attitude that everybody is just trying to get the very best they can and that you, being the ultimate pro, are right there with them. The last thing I would do is take an "I told you so" attitude.

best,

Jose


----------



## Studio E (May 15, 2011)

midphase @ Sat May 14 said:


> WWTSD?



The humor wasn't lost on me. Lol!


----------



## Studio E (May 15, 2011)

Continued thanks guys! It's a lesson to be learned over and over probably. The one thing that I'm really learning is how much time I can spend trying to make others happy when I'd much rather be writing my next film cue. Got to get away from this kind of crap soon and back to the writing I really like.


----------



## germancomponist (May 15, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Mon May 16 said:


> They loved it. Word to the wise.



Cool story, but isn`t this all very poor?

Perfect faces,
perfect breasts,
perfect bodies,
perfect pitch
and so on.

What will happen in 2020? o-[][]-o


----------



## Studio E (May 15, 2011)

Alright Gunther. Now you've crossed the line with me! There is NOTHING wrong with perfect breasts!


----------



## NYC Composer (May 15, 2011)

germancomponist @ Sun May 15 said:


> NYC Composer @ Mon May 16 said:
> 
> 
> > They loved it. Word to the wise.
> ...



It's horrible. Everyone on the radio now sounds like robots singing.
It's still better to know the paradigm than not to know it.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 15, 2011)

The pendulum will swing the other way. Just like how grunge was the response to years of glitzy spandex metal and over-produced rock. And how gangsta hip hop was what succeeded 80's synth pop. And how perfect breasts lost their appeal when . . . oh, wait . . . I guess some things never change.


----------



## johnhamilton (May 16, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Mon 16 May said:


> Mike, are the rumors true - that you have perfect breasts?



:lol:


----------



## Mike Connelly (May 16, 2011)

What software did you use to do the pitch correction in the first place? Or did you do it all manually? If they really just want someone to slap autotune or melodyne on it (assuming that's not what you did in the first place), maybe easiest to just do that.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 16, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sun May 15 said:


> Mike, are the rumors true - that you have perfect breasts?


Oh, look at you, pretending you don't know first hand (so to speak.)


----------



## mverta (May 16, 2011)

I'd say if you have any dreams of working on large-scale commercial projects, you should hand over all your materials, stat, and get used to the feeling of having clueless assholes 1) fuck with your work and 2) bad-mouth you for it after the fact, no matter what you do, or how nice or accommodating you try and be, and then 3) marvel at the irony some point in the future when you end up working with these people again again because there ain't no "permanent" bridges built or burned in the world of commercialism. Money breaks all bonds, and heals all wounds.

General rule of thumb: Your best version is two revisions before the final. 

Amassing enough money or clout to be able to finally decide exactly who you want to work for, under what conditions, is the goal. But this is how it starts.


_Mike


----------



## wst3 (May 17, 2011)

mverta @ Mon May 16 said:


> Amassing enough money or clout to be able to finally decide exactly who you want to work for, under what conditions, is the goal. But this is how it starts._Mike



Dang - that may be the single most depressing post I've ever read! And coming from a guy who is generally positive...


----------



## autopilot (May 17, 2011)

Love it, make it, own it, 
'til it goes out the door
Cos if you did the gig for dough
It isn't yours anymore.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 17, 2011)

autopilot @ Tue May 17 said:


> Love it, make it, own it,
> 'til it goes out the door
> Cos if you did the gig for dough
> It isn't yours anymore.



If you do it for dough, it never really is yours, though you may retain certain right to it.
During the creation process, it can still be screwed with endlessly.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 17, 2011)

wst3 @ Tue May 17 said:


> mverta @ Mon May 16 said:
> 
> 
> > Amassing enough money or clout to be able to finally decide exactly who you want to work for, under what conditions, is the goal. But this is how it starts._Mike
> ...



I don't see it as depressing. I see it as reality.
Can't stand heat/leave kitchen.


----------



## wst3 (May 17, 2011)

NYC Composer @ Tue May 17 said:


> wst3 @ Tue May 17 said:
> 
> 
> > mverta @ Mon May 16 said:
> ...



I never said it wasn't real... but for whatever reason, it just struck me as depressing. Sure the goal is to reach a point where other artists come to you for your contribution to their artistic endeavors, and you are in a position to say yes or no based on whatever criteria you choose. And HOPEFULLY you treat those people with the same courtesy and respect you wish you had been treated with when things were the other way around.

What's depressing is that there really is no good reason to dump on someone just because they have not developed sufficient clout or reputation or don't have the funds to turn you down.

I've been around more than a couple of years, I know that stuff rolls downhill, I just don't think it's necessary. There is a huge difference between asking the new assistant to run down the street for coffee, or asking them to sweep up and turn out the lights, and blaming them for an error in judgement that you made, or asking them to sweep the floor while you pour crushed potato chips where they just swept.

In this case I think the OP got a bum deal on several levels, but the level that annoys me the most is that he is being made the scapegoat. Just not necessary!


----------



## Studio E (May 18, 2011)

I thought that I was going to hear from the middle man yesterday regarding the stems but it's basically been silence. I had already given him the full instrumental track and the female vocal before I had come to the conclusion that I didn't want to do this. Fortunately, I hadn't given him the male, harmonies, or rap portion of the song so it's safe from reproduction. I did send him all of the edits for various lengths of tv and radio spots 5, 10, 30, 60 in various ways, 12 in all I think. In the return email was "Thanks" and that was it.

I think I have made it obvious at this point, how I feel and they have picked up on it. I don't know if it pisses them off or not, nor do I care.

The biggest thing I am walking away with (besides the check,  ) is the knowledge that I need to be more loyal to my gut instincts when dealing with this type of situation and, I need further assistance in dealing with pitch editing. I mean, several of you heard pitch issues that I didn't hear at all so, obviously, my ear isn't good enough to be a vocal producer on my own, and that's ok. I hire people to play all kinds of instruments, and to sing. I can always hire someone to ride shotgun while I'm editing a vocal track. 

I think someone asked what I was using for pitch correction. I was using Cubase 5's built in pitch editor (the manual one) and the other automated pitch correction set to the key of the song. THe automated one I had set to a really conservative level as I didn't want to get the auto-tune effect. I just wanted it to pull things in line better overall. 

I do want to re-communicate with them about this because I can indeed go back in and make this a lot better at this point but if they don't bring it back up, oh well.

Thanks guys!


----------



## Mike Connelly (May 18, 2011)

Whatever the end result is, keep a copy of the version you like best so that you have it available for demo purposes.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 18, 2011)

I don't know that you necessarily made any mistakes in the early stages. It's always a tough one when a client insists on something. Sure, you could have held your ground, but there are a lot of bad things that could have happened that way, too. Not the least of which is that they may have hated any other singer you used, and always wished you had used _their_ singer. That would be worse than the situation you're in now.

It's a gamble either way. I know this is a cliche, but the truth of this business is that you can't win them all.

Regarding pitch, I strongly recommend Melodyne for situations like this. (Over Autotune or any Logic or Cubase pitch correctors.) It doesn't sound "Autotuned" when you use it, even at 100% correction settings. I have complete confidence that this vocal could easily be salvaged (and sound completely natural) in about 5 minutes.


----------



## Studio E (May 18, 2011)

Even with the $99 version?


----------



## Studio E (May 18, 2011)

Whoops, it's 199 isn't it?


----------



## Mike Greene (May 18, 2011)

The one thing I don't like about Celemony is that they change the names of the various Melodyne versions all the freakin' time. So I'm not sure anymore what versions do what.

It appears right now that they have Essential ($99,) Assistant ($249,) Editor ($349,) and Studio ($699.) Believe it or not, I have all four. I originally bought two, then got two more with my ProTools HD rigs (some free promotion or something) and upgraded a couple and somehow I seem to have all four.

I can tell you that Assistant does everything I ever need. I never use the higher end ones, mostly because they're both on my assistant's computer instead of mine. I don't care about the "DNA" stuff that Editor does. (That's where it can fix one note inside a chord. Impressive, but useless to me.) And the multitrack abilities of "Studio" have never been anything I've needed, since you can still plug Assistant or Essential into as many tracks of your sequencer as you want.

So the only question is whether Essential is enough. That one is on my laptop (I think,) which is not here, so I can't be sure about this, but I believe what Essential lacks is ability to flatten vibrato (which I never do anyway) of to fix "drift," which is something I *do* like being able to do, although not that often.

Without the ability to fix drift, Melodyne places the average (over time) pitch of a particular note onto the right place. If it starts flat, but drifts sharp, well, that's what you get. Essential can't "flatten" it. This is rarely a problem, but I do like being able to fix it.

I honestly don't know which you should get, although I'd stick to Essential or Assistant.


----------

