I know this is a stretch, but bear with me...
Do you think it possible for electronics guru-types to come up with a device/software that could change a singer’s voice age and ability? (Live concert use) In other words, we have favorite singers who years ago were so good, and with their own style/sound. Most of them years later the range is shot, and live songs have to be tuned down. No disrespect intended at all—I so badly just wish there was a way a singer could somehow sound as he did back in the day...maybe singing in a lower Octave and the technology changing the output an octave up, keeping the same voice characteristics? An example is one of my favorites, Bob Seger. Man oh man in the late seventies that voice was unbelievable! Today it’s much different (but still love him.) Wouldn’t it be great to hear at least most of that vocal sound again today? Surely technology has advanced so far today that this could be possible?

 

Interesting concept. One approach I could imagine is if you had an exhaustive library of the young voice, with all the phonemes available, and then map the old (but live) voice and replace it with the young. You’d need to be able to bend and skew the voice enough to still capture the nuances of a live performance. Hard but not impossible?

 

A slight modification of that would allow anyone to sound like anyone else.
I think we are still a long way from being able to do that without it sounding artificial.

 

Yes...and it would all have to be done “real time”...

 

Yes...and it would all have to be done “real time”...

OK I am afraid that is going to take another 50 years more to achieve.

Better you accept Nature doing its job.

 

Deep Fake voices with Deep Fake people.

 

For many years, electronics was used to make a singer sing in tune (Frankie Avalon, Drake, etc). They read the lyrics and the electronics sings.
Also when live, some singers play the recording then lip-sync the song.

Because they cannot sing worth a damn!

 

A slight modification of that would allow anyone to sound like anyone else.
I think we are still a long way from being able to do that without it sounding artificial.

I'm not so sure. Consider Siri. The sound is pretty good already and the artificial sound is largely due to context errors, not the voice itself. I mean, the voice doesn't adjust completely to the context of what it is saying. If you combined that voice reproduction capability with, say, a camera on the mouth of the singer and a database of the songs the singer might be singing, I think you could dramatically improve the accuracy.

But, why? Every recorded song is a snapshot in time. If you want to hear that again, just play the recording. One reason to enjoy live music is that it changes. It's familiar but also new with each performance. If I pay to go see Paul McCartney, I don't want to hear a computer no matter how good it is.

 

Doesn't this already exist? Something called "Autotune" or one of it's clones. https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=Autotune

 

A slight modification of that would allow anyone to sound like anyone else.
I think we are still a long way from being able to do that without it sounding artificial.

Hmmm Great idea! Could be used in a new novel...

 

Autotune is VERY obvious.

 

How about the use of this technology by Cher in “ Do You Believe”? It was not intended to imitate her style, but unabashedly to extend it. An amazing use of technology!

 

Good points. Again I know this is a question which has a broad range of answers, and even more questions, but that doesn’t stop folks from asking...after all, if the right inventor is intrigued, only then could it become a possibility.

 

OK I am afraid that is going to take another 50 years more to achieve.

Better you accept Nature doing its job.

Nope. Sorry but this time I’d like to see nature reversed just a little. After all, we don’t stand still in medicine and let nature take its course...

 

I'm not so sure. Consider Siri. The sound is pretty good already and the artificial sound is largely due to context errors, not the voice itself. I mean, the voice doesn't adjust completely to the context of what it is saying. If you combined that voice reproduction capability with, say, a camera on the mouth of the singer and a database of the songs the singer might be singing, I think you could dramatically improve the accuracy.

But, why? Every recorded song is a snapshot in time. If you want to hear that again, just play the recording. One reason to enjoy live music is that it changes. It's familiar but also new with each performance. If I pay to go see Paul McCartney, I don't want to hear a computer no matter how good it is.

I’m with you mostly, except while I’d likely pay (reasonable amount) to see and hear McCartney, I’d still be ecstatic if it were possible to hear him in his voice from the Wings era. I may be alone in this respect, as I may be a little closer to it, coming from a long period of past years performing. Even though I know nature will inevitably stop our beloved entertainers, I want to enjoy them as much as humanly possible before they’re gone—after all, I can’t think of anyone today that’s been able to have the same level of talent. IMHO...and, I do know there are a number of old stars that love performing for fans, and still want to give their all, but are not able to. Other health issues is one thing, but to see the artist in reasonably good shape but just unable to get near the voice they had in their glory days hurts my heart, and theirs too in many cases.
Maybe there’s many that feel like me, maybe not. For sure we know if there was a profit to be had by such technology, it’d be more likely to be invented...

 

How about the use of this technology by Cher in “ Do You Believe”? It was not intended to imitate her style, but unabashedly to extend it. An amazing use of technology!

I see where you went with this, but auto tune isn’t the same at all. I worked in the recording industry when these came out and learned much about them, and watched how singers/producers became crippled (lazy) by them... While it could benefit the singer in helping get to the notes, still the voice would have to be in the neighborhood of the notes for it to sound right.
What I envision is a singer singing an octave lower for example, still with passion/energy, and the audience hearing that familiar high vocal from before. I don’t see it as a “computer voice”, since the sound performance would still have to come from the original singer. And unless it was something obvious, as in the case of seeing a lip sync performer’s actions not match the sound, and at the moment we are let down knowing we are not hearing ANY part of the moment’s actual vocal sounds, but a recording. If that was acceptable, then all we’d need to do is have the singer lip sync to a recorded vocal and the live band. (The Elvis tour of recent years did that—I saw it and it really did lift my spirits, but I still was sad because he was just an image on the screens...now in my mind...lol...if an actual person acted it out, in sync with the voice and screen recordings, I’d likely have passed out! It would have nearly fooled the mind that it could be real...)

 

Again, my whole intent was to pose a “what-if” and how we might get there. And since this forum has always been a great source of knowledge, ideas, and just plain good folks bending over backwards to help guide many like me on how-to items, I thought why not ask to see what technical ideas might be made...
I do remember several years back while working in the studio environment there was some talk going around about a technology being developed that could make ANYONE sound like the star they wanted to sound like. It made the rounds for a while then kind of died off. It sure provided a good source of opinions on how it could hurt or help the music industry...