PDA

View Full Version : Is this singer computer generated?



Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-13, 05:58 AM
Someone in the comment's section of youtube suggested this singer is computer generated. There's no doubt the music is fake, although originally I did not suspect the image is also computer generated/enhanced. Now, I have my doubts.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClkRzsdvg7_RKVhwDwiDZOA

Solfe
2017-Jan-13, 12:33 PM
Why do you think she is CG? She seems to be an aspiring singer. She has been featured in someone else's videos as a backing singer/counter point, which would be odd for a CGI character.

Edit - She is using Linkfire which is a music marketing site and she has contact information for bookings. I would say that she is a real person who sings.

Edit 2 - I got all interested in this because I misread the singers name and thought it was a typo for "K Flay", someone who I have seen live.

SeanF
2017-Jan-13, 03:01 PM
If that's CGI, Lucasfilm needs to up their game.

PetersCreek
2017-Jan-13, 03:54 PM
I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of "fake" music.

publiusr
2017-Jan-13, 07:42 PM
Vocoloids? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocaloid

Swift
2017-Jan-13, 07:53 PM
Is this singer computer controlled? (http://img.weiku.com/a/004/887/DURKOPP_550_16_23_26_CNC_Computer_control_Setting_ Sleeves_Sewing_Machine_473_2.jpg) :D

KaiYeves
2017-Jan-13, 08:46 PM
I saw that episode (http://arthur.wikia.com/wiki/Meet_Binky) of Arthur, too...

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 12:03 AM
I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of "fake" music.

Auto-tune software - most commercial singing these days use it, together with many of the covers etc being published on youtube.

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 12:06 AM
Is this singer computer controlled? (http://img.weiku.com/a/004/887/DURKOPP_550_16_23_26_CNC_Computer_control_Setting_ Sleeves_Sewing_Machine_473_2.jpg) :D


Nice one. I believe she has a recording contract stitched up.

PetersCreek
2017-Jan-14, 12:09 AM
Auto-tune software - most commercial singing these days use it, together with many of the covers etc being published on youtube.

Oh, I know well what Auto-Tune is but as much as I dislike its use in most cases, Auto-Tune \neq fake music.

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 12:53 AM
Oh, I know well what Auto-Tune is but as much as I dislike its use in most cases, Auto-Tune \neq fake music.

Our opinions or conclusions will forever differ on this point.

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 12:55 AM
I should qualify my last post - music, excluding singing, I'm open minded about - singing I'm not.

slang
2017-Jan-14, 12:56 AM
Is this singer computer controlled? (http://img.weiku.com/a/004/887/DURKOPP_550_16_23_26_CNC_Computer_control_Setting_ Sleeves_Sewing_Machine_473_2.jpg) :D

:doh:

I also struggle to understand what "fake music" means. Currently I'm listening to some mix between dance and modern jazz, stitched together (thanks Swift) from many samples taken from other songs. Does that the fact that the creator of this enjoyable sound does not himself play a traditional musical instrument make it fake?

ETA: ok, crossed posts. Auto-tune "fixed" vocals can be "fake". I can live with that characterization, often. Not always.

Solfe
2017-Jan-14, 01:36 AM
Apparently auto-tune is very bad for people who can sing. When Cher used it, it made her sound like a robot. I guess they were happy with it but clearly it doesn't even sound like a person, let alone Cher.

I would imagine that if I used it, it could make my horrendous sing voice sound more like a semi-freakish computerize voice. It'd be a significant improvement. :)

PetersCreek
2017-Jan-14, 01:53 AM
When Cher used it, it made her sound like a robot. I guess they were happy with it but clearly it doesn't even sound like a person, let alone Cher.

The level of auto-tuning is adjustable and my understanding is that the obvious, heavy-handed use of it was intentional in that song. They were going for that sound and according to a documentary I recently half listened to, it was considered ground-breaking by some in the industry.

slang
2017-Jan-14, 02:08 AM
The level of auto-tuning is adjustable and my understanding is that the obvious, heavy-handed use of it was intentional in that song.

As in this song, I think: Owl City - Fireflies (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psuRGfAaju4). Not cheating. Just using a tool to achieve an effect. The use of vocoders, tools to change voice through other instruments, and to have other instruments influenced by voice.. it's ancient.

Solfe
2017-Jan-14, 03:05 AM
If it is the goal, auto tune is nice. Poliša seems to do it very well, as does Passion Pit and Owl City from the link above. I don't know where it is objectionable. Perhaps it is one of those "your mileage may vary" or perhaps "I know it when I hear it".

For some reason, I didn't like the song Believe, but enjoy Daft Punk even though they used the same technique. Pink Floyd uses similar effects, but with different tech. I like that, too. I must not like Cher at all, because that is the only song of hers that I know. Hum... well, I guess you can't please everyone.

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 05:22 AM
Auto-tune is said to "work" better the worse one sings.

I watched a performance of a young woman on a talent show. Her audition appeared "divine". Next round, I believe, the organisers stopped the use of auto-tune. She was awful.

Since then, I have been acutely aware of the device in most singing I come across, either to its presence or not. Sometimes it can be difficult to tell.

I was heartened to see a girl of 12y.o. win AGT last year whose voice and originality defied auto-tune. Her expression was just as much in the off-notes as the correct notes. Listening to her closely educated me in what it was to be an artist - not merely someone who hits the right notes. I realised that singing a song, is just that, singing a song, not necessarily singing technically right notes. Artists know intuitively when to hit the perfect note, and when to hit an "off" one. Amy Winehouse was another artist, not merely a singer.

One can never be an artist using auto-tune. It deprives a singer the opportunity of being an artist. But if you aren't an artist in the first place, then it won't make you sound worse. I'm interested in artists, not singers anymore because I can see anyone with the right equipment can be a singer now no matter how appallingly they actually sing.

The linked to singer in the OP is not an artist, as far as I am concerned. The linked to singer below undoubtedly is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_lAgvch2PE

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 06:18 AM
As in this song, I think: Owl City - Fireflies (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psuRGfAaju4). Not cheating. Just using a tool to achieve an effect. The use of vocoders, tools to change voice through other instruments, and to have other instruments influenced by voice.. it's ancient.

Auto-tune and a distorter were used with that song, putting aside everything else. Yes, done intentionally, of course, with clever effect. If you like it, good, that's part of what the technicians hoped to achieve. It's a simple song spiced up with special effects and an entertaining video clip. It's more a heady ditty than anything resembling a ballad, for example. The special effects meld well with the theme. No sin in all that - it's clever, but if you want deep felt emotion which will bring the listener to their soul felt knees fighting back tears or moved to astoundment, it can't be achieved by any other device than digging deep within oneself.

Strange
2017-Jan-14, 06:23 AM
Why do you think she is CG?

It looks to me like she is singing but the audio track is not the same recording as the video. That (plus her perfect makeup) might make some people think it isn't real.

But as SeanF says, CGI isn't that good (yet).

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 06:48 AM
But as SeanF says, CGI isn't that good (yet).

Yes, I agree. If it is a computer simulation, it's quite an achievement.

But as you have observed there are some anomalies. The more you examine her clips, the more you will see.

Her facial expressions within the one song, and compared to others, seem remarkably uniform. Her hair is out of place in the same places when comparing clips one to another. She is at similar if not the same angles. Either she has caked on the makeup or something odd is going on with her skin texture.

There is one clip amidst her youtube where it appears she is not using auto-tune and she is facing the camera, looking directly into it.

The possible explanation for the quality of the CGI is that it is not 100% CGI, but uses her as its "base" for want of a better term. In this context, like auto-tune which uses the voice of the singer, the CGI might be using an image of the singer comparably.

The Backroad Astronomer
2017-Jan-14, 07:43 AM
These are favorite auto tune artists.
https://youtu.be/tKjbHv_0KKY

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 07:47 AM
These are favorite auto tune artists.
https://youtu.be/tKjbHv_0KKY

Make that a sticky somewhere on this forum :clap:

PetersCreek
2017-Jan-14, 08:13 AM
But as you have observed there are some anomalies. The more you examine her clips, the more you will see.

Her facial expressions within the one song, and compared to others, seem remarkably uniform. Her hair is out of place in the same places when comparing clips one to another. She is at similar if not the same angles. Either she has caked on the makeup or something odd is going on with her skin texture.

I think you're reaching. She has essentially the same hair style in the first six videos on her channel:

http://www.brettluna.com/img/s10/v105/p2171882136-3.jpg (http://www.brettluna.com/img/s10/v105/p2171882136-5.jpg)


The hair that is "out of place" isn't similar enough to me to scream "CGI!" The more parsimonious explanation is that she made pretty consistent (but not identical) styling choices when she was wearing her hair this way. I'm no hair expert myself but my wife has been a stylist for decades and she's trained me to notice hair...especially hers...and most especially when it's a new style or color. In other videos, her hair is markedly different from this style and from video to video. One more thought about the hair: that's been one of the toughest nuts to crack in CGI. If these videos are CGI, the physics and kinesics are most impressive but the hair, that would be a leap far beyond known SOTA, IMO.

Regarding her skin texture, she is very young...or looks to be so, anyway. If you want to see caked on makeup, I know a couple-three 40-something-year-olds who are desperately trying to recreate that skin texture, with unfortunate results. While she is definitely and thoroughly made up, I don't see it as being anywhere near caked on.

Another thing I note about the videos is that they look like they might have been recorded with a mild softening filter, either on camera or in post. It's most noticeable in the highlights in the hair. This could easily play a part in the skin tone appearing smoother and may be a factor in them not seeming quite true-to-life so some folks. One or two of those aforementioned 40-somethings use similar but heavier filters on their Facebook photos and fool absolutely no one but themselves.

As for the similar angles, this is not at all unusual in videos in which someone may be recording themselves in a home or otherwise small studio where they might set up a camera and leave it there. If the mic and other equipment are set up in the same place and the lighting angle is consistent from session to session, there's little reason to reset the camera every time.

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 08:28 AM
I think you're reaching. She has essentially the same hair style in the first six videos on her channel:

http://www.brettluna.com/img/s10/v105/p2171882136-3.jpg (http://www.brettluna.com/img/s10/v105/p2171882136-5.jpg)


The hair that is "out of place" isn't similar enough to me to scream "CGI!" The more parsimonious explanation is that she made pretty consistent (but not identical) styling choices when she was wearing her hair this way. I'm no hair expert myself but my wife has been a stylist for decades and she's trained me to notice hair...especially hers...and most especially when it's a new style or color. In other videos, her hair is markedly different from this style and from video to video. One more thought about the hair: that's been one of the toughest nuts to crack in CGI. If these videos are CGI, the physics and kinesics are most impressive but the hair, that would be a leap far beyond known SOTA, IMO.

Regarding her skin texture, she is very young...or looks to be so, anyway. If you want to see caked on makeup, I know a couple-three 40-something-year-olds who are desperately trying to recreate that skin texture, with unfortunate results. While she is definitely and thoroughly made up, I don't see it as being anywhere near caked on.

Another thing I note about the videos is that they look like they might have been recorded with a mild softening filter, either on camera or in post. It's most noticeable in the highlights in the hair. This could easily play a part in the skin tone appearing smoother and may be a factor in them not seeming quite true-to-life so some folks. One or two of those aforementioned 40-somethings use similar but heavier filters on their Facebook photos and fool absolutely no one but themselves.

As for the similar angles, this is not at all unusual in videos in which someone may be recording themselves in a home or otherwise small studio where they might set up a camera and leave it there. If the mic and other equipment are set up in the same place and the lighting angle is consistent from session to session, there's little reason to reset the camera every time.

Ok, that pretty much removes my doubts, which have been building. The best part of removing my doubts, however, was the humour.

Solfe
2017-Jan-14, 02:10 PM
As for the uniform facial expression, she has likely sung and resung the end result dozens of times. It is a complex problem for her, not exactly a performance. If she manages not to look bad and the audio is good, that is a win for her. For the moment, she isn't going for stage presence.

Canis Lupus
2017-Jan-14, 03:21 PM
As for the uniform facial expression, she has likely sung and resung the end result dozens of times. It is a complex problem for her, not exactly a performance. If she manages not to look bad and the audio is good, that is a win for her. For the moment, she isn't going for stage presence.

If she were a geisha girl, she'd be doing just fine. Maybe she's a modern variant.

Delvo
2017-Jan-16, 12:38 AM
I only watched part of one video, but the way she moved her head definitely looked to me like the way a video game character moves its head. It's like what a human might do if (s)he grew up with only video games to learn body language from.

Canis Lupus
2017-Feb-06, 06:37 AM
I only watched part of one video, but the way she moved her head definitely looked to me like the way a video game character moves its head. It's like what a human might do if (s)he grew up with only video games to learn body language from.

Good point

TrAI
2017-Feb-08, 04:48 PM
Someone in the comment's section of youtube suggested this singer is computer generated. There's no doubt the music is fake, although originally I did not suspect the image is also computer generated/enhanced. Now, I have my doubts.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClkRzsdvg7_RKVhwDwiDZOA

Well, considering that she seems to have registered her channel back in 2011, her first videos was uploaded then, and that she has a few songs released and made a few public appearances, I think it is a bit unlikely that she is computer generated.

There is other information out there on the web, of course, but it wouldn't really add to the discussion(CG "artists" often do have fake back stories), and one should always be careful with reposting data about people, even when it is technically public.

Canis Lupus
2017-Feb-11, 09:11 PM
Getting back to artistry, I came across this last.night:

https://youtu.be/GuanbnnzXQ4 .

As posted elsewhere about it, upon awakening the answer is ""Yes!" - a very big YES! "