Ableton Forum

...in promoting their new album is that they state quite clearly in the press release for it that it was done--start to finish, including writing, recording, mixing, everything--in less than 3 weeks. if the results are astounding, that's great, but when the results aren't stellar, it's not a smart move to make a big deal about how quickly you recorded an album. i remember about 7 or 8 years ago when Felix "the house cat" Stallings and some of his crew were making a big deal about how they were releasing tracks that had been written, recorded, mixed down, etc, from start to finish in a couple of hours and that they were banging these out day after day, and these were A sides of singles, not filler cuts on albums and, i tell ya, some of the resulting singles/records sounded like it! (ie that they were banged out start to finish in a couple of hours like a factory-worker; in short, they should've spent more time on 'em). i don't think musicians should ever brag about how quickly something was recorded or the opposite either, ie how long it took to record something because, either way, unless the result is awesome, it will cause people to go "oh yeah, they recorded too quickly" or "they spent too much time on this and overcooked it"/
"they spent X years on recording this crap?! geez, if they were going to record crap, why didn't they get it done quicker?"; etc. my cdn .02. andrew

innerdreamrecords.com wrote:Falling out or not I wouldn't put out crap just to spite my label. Bad business imo.

I would, if I was very fucking convinced my next album would tear the charts appart.

Somehow, I hope they will ...

AndrewDuke wrote:...in promoting their new album is that they state quite clearly in the press release for it that it was done--start to finish, including writing, recording, mixing, everything--in less than 3 weeks. if the results are astounding, that's great, but when the results aren't stellar, it's not a smart move to make a big deal about how quickly you recorded an album. i remember about 7 or 8 years ago when Felix "the house cat" Stallings and some of his crew were making a big deal about how they were releasing tracks that had been written, recorded, mixed down, etc, from start to finish in a couple of hours and that they were banging these out day after day, and these were A sides of singles, not filler cuts on albums and, i tell ya, some of the resulting singles/records sounded like it! (ie that they were banged out start to finish in a couple of hours like a factory-worker; in short, they should've spent more time on 'em). i don't think musicians should ever brag about how quickly something was recorded or the opposite either, ie how long it took to record something because, either way, unless the result is awesome, it will cause people to go "oh yeah, they recorded too quickly" or "they spent too much time on this and overcooked it"/
"they spent X years on recording this crap?! geez, if they were going to record crap, why didn't they get it done quicker?"; etc. my cdn .02. andrew

i am convinced that the best songs are written in a couple of hours....

Leonard Cohen wrote:Bob, I quite liked that Blowing In The Wind song of yours. How long did it take to write it?

Bob Dylan wrote:15 minutes. How long did it take you to write Hallelujah?

Cohen wrote:8 years

...

(And I think it shows. Both approaches have their merits - freshness vs. profoundness, maybe?)

SimonPHC wrote:

innerdreamrecords.com wrote:Falling out or not I wouldn't put out crap just to spite my label. Bad business imo.

I would, if I was very fucking convinced my next album would tear the charts appart.

Somehow, I hope they will ...

I don't agree. If DP made a mistake in signing a contract with their record label, it is not good business for them to release a load of crap just to leave the contract behind.
After all, it is the consumer who pays the money for the album. So basically they are just pissing on their fan base in pursuit of their commercial goals.

Their Debut was something that suited the market for cute funky electronica at the time, but their last one purely filtered vomit for pop-muppets. "One more time" says it all. That said, can't criticise anyone for writing good pop music. It pays the bills.

If they are releasing a contract breaker they could at least have called it "P2Pme" or "mixes for cash" just to make it more obvious that it is a load of rubbish.

Listening to Human After All is certainly does sound like they smeared-out to album-length a load of unfinished ideas with no potential.

Boy am I glad I didn't pay for it.

I bought Beck's new album recently. A much more satisfying listen. Have a lot of respect for that guy. He flies close to the burning sun of poppishness, which is a risky business in fickle markets. But has come back very strongly with Guero. That said, maybe I'll be sick of it in a week. But he's done a great job re-innovating himself and bring us some good new material.

Uggh, listening to Human After All again now, it really is worthless formulaic tripe.

noisetonepause wrote:

Leonard Cohen wrote:Bob, I quite liked that Blowing In The Wind song of yours. How long did it take to write it?

Bob Dylan wrote:15 minutes. How long did it take you to write Hallelujah?

Cohen wrote:8 years

...

(And I think it shows. Both approaches have their merits - freshness vs. profoundness, maybe?)

i agree totally with your post and the post above that some of the best songs are written quickly, but please re-read my post;i said an artist shouldn't BRAG in their press release about how quickly or how long it took to record something--cos that can backfire. Cohen and Dylan didn't BRAG in the accompanying press releases about how quickly/slowly they recorded those classics. Andrew

i like all the acid stuff , the cheezy bit is a bit to floffy for me .

I would not hate to tute my horn, but personally I think all Daft Punk is absolutely completely boring and a perfect example of why some people hate electronic music. How much worse can you get than a song like "Around the world". More like, I fell asleep while going around the world. The thing that gets me is how ambient music is even less exciting than Daft Punk, but it is perfect for me. All I can say is Daft Punk sucks period.

suburbanbather wrote:I would not hate to tute my horn, but personally I think all Daft Punk is absolutely completely boring and a perfect example of why some people hate electronic music. How much worse can you get than a song like "Around the world". More like, I fell asleep while going around the world. The thing that gets me is how ambient music is even less exciting than Daft Punk, but it is perfect for me. All I can say is Daft Punk sucks period.

guess that's a NAY ....

I loved the last two albums but as a die hard fan this pushed my patience. It's just not very good and only took a few weeks to make - sounds like it unfortunately!

I liked some of their earlier work.

On this album it seems like they found a good groove, but then could never find any progression or changes out of that groove...

so the first 8 bars are repeated endlessly... robot rock

Daft Punk are playing at my house...

They went seriously cheesy with all that 70's prog synth extravaganza on the last album. I can't hear any of that stuff without thinking of ELO. And I usually try very hard not to think about ELO.

But respect to them for the classic stuff they have produced. Wish I had their skills (actually I'd rather have their bank accounts...)