Further thoughts on Barthes

According to Barthes on page 280, there is no neutral voice. The neutral voice, if found, produces “a frozen world, one in which desire is dead” (280). In essence, the voice that is used in day to day or for musical purposes is loaded with eroticism. Barthes thus situates an implicit desire in life that is actualized through the voice. In order to access this desire, Barthes shows one venue, that being the voice. Basically, by avoiding articulation, the clear phonic intensity to consonants that ultimate result in a voice with “parasitical clarity,”or meaning, one favors a “lover’s discourse” otherwise known as the grain of the voice. It is the expression of desire or pleasure that a voice with grain can successfully communicate. In looking at the video posted from seconds 50 and on the singer demonstrates the magic of auto tune. What one sees is how auto-tune alters one’s natural voice, making his voice stay in the right key and pitch. I am left wondering whether this element in particular, autotune, can distort the voice enough to produce the frozen world lacking in desire. My thoughts are still a bit hazy regarding these issues, but the autotuned version does not appear to be the “lover’s discourse” type of music Barthes favors.
Other questions that I have had while re-reading the text: While distinguishing between the two types of voices, Barthes does not make it clear whether a person can transition between them. That is, can the grain of the voice develop in an artist or person through training against articulation? Or if once present in a voice, is it possible to lose the act of pronunciation for one of articulation?