Author Topic: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)  (Read 3876 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

mogwai

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Respect: +67
daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« on: November 22, 2007, 10:24:15 PM »
0

mogwai

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Respect: +67
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #1 on: November 23, 2007, 10:52:04 AM »
0
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 10:12:29 PM by polkablues »

mogwai

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Respect: +67
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #2 on: November 23, 2007, 11:11:29 AM »
0
okay, why don't you like it then?
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 10:12:59 PM by polkablues »

diggler

  • The Return Threshold
  • ****
  • Posts: 914
  • Respect: +67
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #3 on: November 23, 2007, 10:22:22 PM »
0
alive 2007 is pretty much the same as the coachella recording, but the sound quality is great. the best part is the human>together>music sounds better with you encore, which was the only thing that i hadn't heard.

i still like the chemical brothers more
I'm not racist, I'm just slutty

mogwai

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Respect: +67
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #4 on: November 24, 2007, 05:10:33 PM »
0
Quote
Quote
Because unlike Alive 1997, Alive 2007 sucks.

okay, why don't you like it then?

I'm curious to know what you actually know about electronic music (and/or French house) if anything...

WHY DON'T YOU LIKE IT THEN???
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 10:13:24 PM by polkablues »

mogwai

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1208
  • Respect: +67
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #5 on: November 25, 2007, 03:48:48 AM »
0
whatever.

cron

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3292
  • deeply superficial
  • Respect: +9
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #6 on: November 25, 2007, 04:37:46 PM »
0
daft punk's a complicated matter for me. i saw electroma and i posted about it in a thread that nobody read, but that movie is an anatomy of the assets and the liabilities daft punk has. i'd say one of their worst characteristics is that they're unoriginal to the core, like you just pointed out, REDACTED. ( ). also, they're enfuriatingly monotonous sometimes. and i don't know what to make of the religious-like fandom of their live tour. i guess they're the contemporary equivalent to pink floyd.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 10:13:56 PM by polkablues »
context, context, context.

tpfkabi

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2673
  • Respect: +22
    • twitter deed, twitter dead. in the heart or in the head?
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #7 on: November 25, 2007, 10:25:37 PM »
0
daft punk's enfuriatingly monotonous sometimes.

I agree with this statement, though I have not delved into all their work.

Over the years I read about the group many times. About a month ago, I finally bought Homework after watching a few videos from that album and reading numerous positive reviews. I really like it in bits, but the use of that same techno beat just really wears on me - especially when it goes on and on for 10 minutes with little change.

I'm definitely not saying some one is "wrong" for liking music of this sort, just personally it does very little for me. I think I would have done better getting the recent compilation of their first 3 albums, but looking at the tracklisting after the fact, some of the most tracks I found most interesting on Homework did not make that.

LCD Soundsystem is obviously largely influenced by Daft Punk (namedropping them in a song) but he also has the addition of lyrics and melody that makes it more interesting to me - though he still goes on a bit long for me at times.
I am Torgo. I take care of the place while the Master is away.

Chest Rockwell

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
  • Respect: 0
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #8 on: November 26, 2007, 08:45:33 AM »
0
i'd say one of their worst characteristics is that they're unoriginal to the core, like you just pointed out, REDACTED.
First off, I don't think REDACTED said that. Secondly, I don't see that they're "unoriginal to the core," as they basically started French House, from what I understand. I think it's hard to argue with Homework and Discovery; as dance albums go you can hardly get more enjoyable than the two early recordings. They're over the hill, but so is most every other electronic artist that started in the nineties - Boards of Canada, Squarepusher, and Meat Beat being the only exceptions I can think of.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 10:14:41 PM by polkablues »

cron

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3292
  • deeply superficial
  • Respect: +9
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #9 on: November 26, 2007, 01:51:07 PM »
0
french house started in the seventies with jean michel jarre. and there's laurent garnier after him. even serge gainsbourg has some albums with electronic music. so they didn't started shit.  they started as a rock band called Darlin' that got a bad review at melody maker and that's where they got the name for daft punk. they also didn't invented the robot musicians thing, that's as old as krautrock is. that's what i meant by unoriginal to the core. if you take their 'essential' concepts, there's nothing ground-breaking and innovative about them. and if you didn't check that youtube link i posted, please do so.
context, context, context.

Chest Rockwell

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1596
  • Respect: 0
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #10 on: November 26, 2007, 09:18:36 PM »
0
french house started in the seventies with jean michel jarre. and there's laurent garnier after him. even serge gainsbourg has some albums with electronic music. so they didn't started shit. they started as a rock band called Darlin' that got a bad review at melody maker and that's where they got the name for daft punk.they also didn't invented the robot musicians thing, that's as old as krautrock is. that's what i meant by unoriginal to the core. if you take their 'essential' concepts, there's nothing ground-breaking and innovative about them. and if you didn't check that youtube link i posted, please do so.
Well, I'm not super-familiar with French electronica but I don't think those guys were at all like Daft Punk (Garnier is arguable, I guess, but if anything Jarre influenced Air more than Daft Punk). Electronic yes, but that's just as vague a description as rock. But maybe you're right and I'm just mistaken.

They didn't change their name. It was a different group, with Laurent Brancowitz of Phoenix fame also included.

About the youtube link, it doesn't mean anything. They didn't go to any length to hide where they sampled the music from. In fact, the liner notes list all those songs. They've said in interviews several times that the point of the album is to allude to childhood, thus the heavy sampling from songs they heard as kids.

cron

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3292
  • deeply superficial
  • Respect: +9
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #11 on: November 26, 2007, 10:08:40 PM »
0

About the youtube link, it doesn't mean anything.

but to me it does. if you don't mind heavy sampling , then there's no crime. if you think it's a valid artistic resource  to use heavy sampling to evoke your childhood, that is fine. if i made music, i wouldn't use a sampling of whigfield or scatman or the macarena or innercycle for the sole purpose of alluding my childhood. i think i'd write a song in the vein of 'saturday morning' by the eels.http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/Saturday-Morning-lyrics-Eels/ECD5082F616BDE1748256D430006B0E5

i think heavy sampling is a vice now. i think it's the equivalent to the reference-saturated-emptiness that surrounds the new stuff by tarantino, (who by the way also is crazy about his childhood) and the like. lately i've been trying to  detox from all the fucking ephimeral music i got into in the past years and getting back to the stuff i really like. the stuff i can listen to in shuffle without pretending i care about it.  that excludes a lot of stuff in daft punk's catalogue. i just can't connect to shit like Steam Machine or Alive 2007. i don't see what their big contribution to the world of music is anymore.

on the topic of childhood and art . picasso said that every child is an artist , but the problem is to remain an artist.
context, context, context.

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 12170
  • on the not-face of it
  • Respect: +774
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #12 on: November 26, 2007, 10:55:29 PM »
0
Quote
And how inappropriate on a FILM forum anyway.

this is the music section.

we also talk about buttmash.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 10:15:30 PM by polkablues »
under the paving stones.

Pubrick

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 12170
  • on the not-face of it
  • Respect: +774
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #13 on: November 26, 2007, 11:08:06 PM »
0
that's just one example.

and i don't think anything got out of hand, you gave some excellent replies that were beyond what was necessary considering all mogwai could say was "whatever". that's when you shoulda stopped really.

i'll add that daft punk are boring commercial music now. i did like them when i was a kid, but not with any depth or cos i appreciated whatever the fuck role they played in some movement i wasn't even aware of. i've never taken music that seriously, precisely because these arguments of personal preference are more impossible to justify than they are in film. oh yeah, my belief that they are somehow more commercial now than ever before is that they are touring australia come january and a lot of ppl i know who were NEVER into them bought tickets at a whopping $125 or someshit. i swear they are secretly going just in vain hope of seeing KANYE.  :shock:

but i can't really hold it against them. most ppl are more musically idiotic than they could ever be cinematically. i don't believe anyone my age could be a reputable music expert in the same way i could believe they have exceptional knowledge of film. only if they specialized at the expense of everything else, like they know everything about hip hop. i know and admire ppl like that.

i think mogwai has good knowledge of music and a healthy eclectic taste. other ppl i trust mostly are cronopio and lately you (REDACTED), all seem to name drop shit i might like. point is, fuck indie bullshit.  :yabbse-smiley:
« Last Edit: July 22, 2009, 10:16:04 PM by polkablues »
under the paving stones.

Stefen

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 7777
  • smh
  • Respect: +191
Re: daft punk - ALIVE (1997 > 2007 > 1997)
« Reply #14 on: November 26, 2007, 11:10:44 PM »
0
whatever
Let's go to a motel. We don't have to do anything -- we could just swim.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy