Deliberate Distortion

Vocals (everything - actually) are very processed on most popular music. Deliberate distortion gives some additional "texture" by bringing in some artificial harmonics. I guess it comes down to taste. It's well accepted in the guitar world, of course.

Why do they do it? To mask the fact they can't really sing or play their instruments probably.

Caro Emerald, Adele, Duffy (overcooked vocals / clipping), very poor engineering and easily avoidable.

Killing Joke should have plenty of distortion, but 'Absolute Dissent' manages to sound arid, emaciated and unpleasant. Peter Murphy's latest 'Lion' is overcooked too, everything turned to 11!

Over-hot, clipped vocals are not what I was talking about. But you're right, there is no excuse for that. A consequence of the loudness wars.

Nail, head, meet hammer.

Sorry  

No need. We're on the same page.

It's a real shame as it ruins what could be great sounding music

Meh, it's just an aesthetic choice. Whether it's a good one or not is up to the listener.

There's a place for it as a specific effect contrasting to well engineered undistorted, unclipped material.  Voices and acoustic instruments should normally be left natural otherwise they soon sound either false or just plain awful.

Unless, of course, you're listening via a smart-phone MP3 player (when you won't notice, 'cause it all sounds awful anyway),   Hang on a minute, that's how most music is played these days, so why should the engineers bother about quality?  Just make it loud, come what may.

Now I'm feeling depressed... 

Think I'll listen to some Morrissey - that'll cheer me up.

Great music does not actually need a great recorded quality to be worth listening to, but poor music seems to be recorded badly as a rule.

Perhaps the truth of the poorness of the music requires embellishment?

But the embellishment does nothing for me. It is still poor music, and deservedly ephemeral. 

Any music recorded poorly nowadays does not deserve a second listening ...

ATB from George

+1,

OK. +10 (if I can do that)!

Has it not always been thus? I have recordings from the 70s, 60s, 50s and 40s that often exhibit degrees of clipping and distortion on vocals - even on my beloved Sandy Denny ... if I am honest I don't mind  it as often as it can add some atmosphere. And of course Joe Meek developed the art of deliberate distortion / saturation clipping in the 60s to provide compression, punch and bite into his pop songs.

Simon 

Distortion adds nothing. 

When applied intentionally it is an ineffective shield against  musical inability, and easy critically analysed as musical weakness ...

Un-intentional distortion is an altogether just a question of the technology available at the time ...

Worked quite well for Hendrix

George, Joe Meek used distortion as a creative tool - and has been developed and enhanced by the industry ever since.

True I can't imagine such techniques being used on classical music, but pop and rock music is something else. The art here is often  optimum replay on basic audio equipment to make the audio  stand out and grab attention or simply to provide texture and bite to the sound such as with the fuzz box and  valve guitar amps driven to saturation.

Back in the 60s pushing tape levels into saturation was often a good way of achieving soft distortion and a degree of compression at the same time. These days this is often simulated digitally (at least in my digital recording equipment  and its software tools for emulating this).

I find the  book called 'Joe Meek's Bold Techniques' by Barry Cleveland  a fascinating insight into the techniques and early tools used for these recording methods  - primarily for the pop single/song. Joe Meek, Les Paul and thousands of producers and engineers since have seen the creativity from the recording, mixing, processing (including distortion) and mastering  as a key part of the end recorded product - and some like Meek perhaps saw it more important than the musicians themselves.

I agree the the distortion from the 40s and early 50s was probably due to technology limitations as compression and limiting technology was extremely primitive if available at all at that time.

Simon

A visit to a guitar shop will demonstrate the enormous scope for creativity in the various effects pedals, which include a whole range of 'distortions'. Their use is unrelated to poor recordings. Piano music for treated instruments is no different. The listener may not like it, but one cannot say simply that it's a cover for poor musicianship.

Dishonest artistry?

The problem of bogus artists really started with Meek [the arch Charlatan in recording]  at the beginning of the 1960s.

A straight recordring is all that is required to reveal the truth ... It does not need to be better than than technology of the day ...

Even better if live with out edits ...

Shyte canot be polished beyond being shiny shyte ...

What a load of bollux. If it had been properly recorded, it would have been recognised for what is was.- terribly performed memorable [but undeveloped] tune. Very badly recorded ... and the modulation is a total embarrassment. Fancy a harmonic change of the semi-tone rise [totally unrelated in the musical sense at 2 minutes 20] without at least a dominant seventh chord to lead the way. Similar to not using the definite or indefinite article in writing comprehensible English ... and the recording sucks, which in the ear;y sixties it not have fdne 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBYdp84AwuU

Crap pop music has been with us for most of our lives and it would do well to recognise the fact ....

We will have to agree to disagree George.  In the music I love distortion is used on a regular basis but they also use it in live performances too. If it's added to in post production I probably agree but I don't accept that deliberate distortion is a bad thing when used as a creative choice by a skilled musician 

+1

After all, life would be very boring if I couldn't use overdrive, digital delay, reverb etc etc. 

I believe that the deliberate, calculated use of distortion in pop, rock and electronic music can represent an honest attempt at creativity, and has no bearing on the skill level of the musicians.

But back in 1998, when Cher hit the airwaves with "Believe", I think many of us smelled a rat. I recall arguing with friends over whether her voice had been "processed". Some actually thought it was natural improvement from vocal lessons, but of course, it turned out to be the infamous AutoTune. Despite the recording topping all worldwide charts, selling many millions of copies and winning a Grammy, I still feel it was a thoroughly dishonest effort. Worse yet, it started a horrible trend that continues to this day.  Even worse, many choose to use AutoTune for live performances, feeling it represents a "safety net" that results in uniformly good shows.

I suppose an argument could be made that I am contradicting myself, and that both are deliberate forms of "machine aided" music. Still, the former strikes me as honest, while the latter does not.

Hook

but ...

Dear Char, in so many case the original music and performance was shyte!

Crap artistry, ...  and crap recording cannot mask the fact.

No amount of decent replay will replace the emptiness of the the original music and performance. by raw and incomplete, musical untalented amateurs ...