Comment by thaumasiotes

> It’s cheaper to have some mediocre singer do the track and fix it later. You don’t have to pay the great singer. And if you do get a great singer, you don’t keep them in the studio for as long. It’s just a cost savings.

I think you're on to something, but it isn't quite what you think it is.

Corrections are largely a cost issue. But not because singers are so expensive.

The costs being saved are related to the rarity of finding someone who is a great singer at the same time that they're also a great dancer and stunningly attractive. It's much easier to find someone who's an outlier on one dimension than someone who's an outlier on two. If you want someone who is extreme on three dimensions (that you specify in advance), you probably won't be able to find that person at all.

Corrections in production mean that you can achieve something like this:

- Beauty: extreme natural talent, plus help from consultants, stylists, makeup artists, etc

- Dance: about what an average person can achieve through intensive training

- Vocals: extreme machine-supplied talent

at low cost. There are other possible approaches. You could look for a great singer who's willing to have tons of plastic surgery. You could look for a great dancer who's willing to have their singing and physical appearance 'corrected' for a trifecta. I don't actually think either of those would make for a cultural improvement - to the extent that we aren't already doing them - compared to what we have now.