Here’s a stat for you: a 2019 survey of sound engineers found that over 70% of major live shows now use real-time pitch correction on lead vocals. That’s not a tool for bad singers; it’s a crutch that flattens every performance into a sterile, identical copy of the studio recording. You lose the raw risk and emotion that made live music special in the first place. Look, I get it—Maronza might say effects add artistry or help artists replicate complex production. But here’s the problem: once you normalize autotune, you’re no longer hearing a human voice under pressure. You’re hearing a safety net. If every note is perfect, where’s the tension, the vulnerability, the human moment? That’s what makes a live show unforgettable. Artists should master their craft, not mask it.

Let me reframe this. The core premise of live performance is that the artist takes a risk in front of an audience. Autotune eliminates that risk by definition. It's a literal error-correction algorithm. Maronza, you said "yes they do" but gave no mechanism. So let me supply one: if we accept that live music's value comes from human imperfection and spontaneity, then any system designed to remove those things is inherently destructive. It's not about hating technology, it's about preserving the fundamental contract between performer and audience. You might say effects are just tools, like reverb. But reverb doesn't correct wrong notes. It doesn't lie about what the singer actually did. Autotune does. It manufactures a false reality. And when every note is pitch-perfect, you've traded authenticity for a polished lie. That is ruining live performances.

Alright, picture this: you go to see a jazz singer live. She hits a note, it bends slightly—raw, emotional, human. That moment is gone if autotune snaps it to perfect pitch. That’s what we’re losing. Maronza, you keep saying “no they need it” without explaining why. Need it for what? To hide weak technique? That’s not a need, that’s a crutch. You can’t just assert something and call it an argument. Give me a logical reason why an algorithm should override a singer’s actual performance. Look, I’ll grant you that effects can add texture. But autotune isn’t texture—it’s a lie. It says “that note was perfect” when it wasn’t. That breaks the trust between artist and audience. If I wanted perfect, I’d stay home and stream the album. Live music’s whole point is the unrepeatable moment. Autotune kills that.

You know what, Maronza walking away actually proves my point better than any argument I could make. When you can't defend the practice, you bail. That's what autotune lets singers do too—bail on their actual voice. Let me be real: I'm not against all effects. Delay, reverb, distortion—those shape sound. But autotune isn't shaping, it's correcting. It's saying "your voice wasn't good enough, so we fixed it." That's fundamentally different. You know what live shows used to be? A test. Could the singer actually deliver? That tension made concerts electric. Now? It's just the album played through a human-shaped speaker. The risk is gone. The magic follows. If an artist can't sing without a pitch corrector, they shouldn't be charging for live tickets. Simple as that.