Can someone explain this Daft Punk business?

So, I get the big joke every year is that Daft Punk is headlining, but why is it such a unrealistic expectation? Do they want too much money? Do they not give a shit about playing at Coachella again? Was their performance in 2006 such a masterpiece that everyone wants it repeated every year from now till' the end of time?

I'm trying to put this in the nicest most non-trolling way possible. Mainly because I'm a huge Daft Punk fan and am genuinely wondering why it's such a 'joke'. Do you senior board members / Coachella veterans think there is the slightest chance Daft Punk will play Coachella again?

its just an ongoing band people want since they played in 06. it seems like every year the big 3 wishlist is radiohead, daft punk, bowie.

1. Revolutionize house
2. Tour 3 times
3.
4. Profit

They are producing new material with Paul Williams and Nile Rodgers so new album and tour seem realistic and 2012 might actually be the year it happens

2013*

More like this:

1. Steal blatantly from the 1970s.
2. Hire really cool people to direct your videos
3. Get played to the point of nauseating any reasonable person
4. Go away for a decade
5. ??????
6. Come back with all the music you stole mixed together in 3-4 layers, hire really cool people to make you a dope light show.
7. PROFIT!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psychic friend

its just an ongoing band people want since they played in 06. it seems like every year the big 3 wishlist is radiohead, daft punk, bowie.

---

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lw...xhrqo1_500.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RotationSlimWang

More like this:

1. Steal blatantly from the 1970s.
2. Hire really cool people to direct your videos
3. Get played to the point of nauseating any reasonable person
4. Go away for a decade
5. ??????
6. Come back with all the music you stole mixed together in 3-4 layers, hire really cool people to make you a dope light show.
7. PROFIT!!!!

---

Hatersgoinhate.gif

An almost immediate response from PF, must mean Daft Punk is confirmed for 2013

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nealocus

So, I get the big joke every year is that Daft Punk is headlining, but why is it such a unrealistic expectation? Do they want too much money? Do they not give a shit about playing at Coachella again? Was their performance in 2006 such a masterpiece that everyone wants it repeated every year from now till' the end of time?

I'm trying to put this in the nicest most non-trolling way possible. Mainly because I'm a huge Daft Punk fan and am genuinely wondering why it's such a 'joke'. Do you senior board members / Coachella veterans think there is the slightest chance Daft Punk will play Coachella again?

---

Part of the reason it's almost unrealistic, is because Thomas Bangalter has said he won't be playing anymore due to his tinnitus.

Also what PF said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mike Litoris

Part of the reason it's almost unrealistic, is because Thomas Bangalter has said he won't be playing anymore due to his tinnitus.

Also what PF said.

---

When & where did he say this? People were talking about his tinnitus ruling out any future Daft Punk performances prior to their appearance on the 2006 poster so unless there was an article that came out fewer than 5 years ago (meaning after the 2007 tour ended), that's not the reason they'd never perform at Coachella again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Somewhat Damaged

When & where did he say this? People were talking about his tinnitus ruling out any future Daft Punk performances prior to their appearance on the 2006 poster so unless there was an article that came out fewer than 5 years ago (meaning after the 2007 tour ended), that's not the reason they'd never perform at Coachella again.

---

Whoops, you are correct. I read the article a while ago and I guess I should have gone back to read it again. The article I read was from 2004, and after I reread it, I realized that it even says something to the effect of "his tinnitus has improved." Damn my selective memory.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RotationSlimWang

More like this:

1. Steal blatantly from the 1970s.
2. Hire really cool people to direct your videos
3. Get played to the point of nauseating any reasonable person
4. Go away for a decade
5. ??????
6. Come back with all the music you stole mixed together in 3-4 layers, hire really cool people to make you a dope light show.
7. PROFIT!!!!

---

You never listened to Homework, have you? Because none of that applies to Homework

Randy is being too kind. Daft Punk is dumb music for dumb people. They dress up in stupid children's halloween costumes because dumb people dig that shit. Oooh look at the pretty lights. The PT Barnum of modern music: a sucker born every minute. There is nothing interesting ever in any of their songs. Cheap gimmicks that are impressive to people who are easily impressed by cheap gimmicks. More akin to Limp Bizkit than to Radiohead or Bowie.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomAz

Randy is being too kind. Daft Punk is dumb music for dumb people. They dress up in stupid children's halloween costumes because dumb people dig that shit. Oooh look at the pretty lights. The PT Barnum of modern music: a sucker born every minute. There is nothing interesting ever in any of their songs. Cheap gimmicks that are impressive to people who are easily impressed by cheap gimmicks. More akin to Limp Bizkit than to Radiohead or Bowie.

---

yeah, except people liked Daft Punk before any of that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomAz

Randy is being too kind. Daft Punk is dumb music for dumb people. They dress up in stupid children's halloween costumes because dumb people dig that shit. Oooh look at the pretty lights. The PT Barnum of modern music: a sucker born every minute. There is nothing interesting ever in any of their songs. Cheap gimmicks that are impressive to people who are easily impressed by cheap gimmicks. More akin to Limp Bizkit than to Radiohead or Bowie.

---

This is so stupid from a music theory stand-point.

Tons of bro-idiots "like" Daft Punk (or think they do), sure, but to generalize every song "ever"? Stupid as fuck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psychic friend

it seems like every year the big 3 wishlist is radiohead, daft punk, bowie.

---

Since Radiohead is outta the way (for now) its now Outkast instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomAz

Randy is being too kind. Daft Punk is dumb music for dumb people. They dress up in stupid children's halloween costumes because dumb people dig that shit. Oooh look at the pretty lights. The PT Barnum of modern music: a sucker born every minute. There is nothing interesting ever in any of their songs. Cheap gimmicks that are impressive to people who are easily impressed by cheap gimmicks. More akin to Limp Bizkit than to Radiohead or Bowie.

---

You both have good points but I think you're being too harsh. Everyone should enjoy getting down and dumb sometimes, much like watching a Transformers movie. But yes they're over-rated and I'd prefer an Underworld set.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TomAz

Randy is being too kind. Daft Punk is dumb music for dumb people. They dress up in stupid children's halloween costumes because dumb people dig that shit. Oooh look at the pretty lights. The PT Barnum of modern music: a sucker born every minute. There is nothing interesting ever in any of their songs. Cheap gimmicks that are impressive to people who are easily impressed by cheap gimmicks. More akin to Limp Bizkit than to Radiohead or Bowie.

---

Tell it to these guys who went to see their first ever US show at a rave in Wisconsin 16 years ago this month:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M-fulZStKY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Electrotek

Tell it to these guys who went to see their first ever US show at a rave in Wisconsin 16 years ago this month:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M-fulZStKY

---

I would take that over anything in the Sahara this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Electrotek

You never listened to Homework, have you? Because none of that applies to Homework

---

Explain to me how any of that doesn't apply to Homework.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RotationSlimWang

Explain to me how any of that doesn't apply to Homework.

---

They didn't go away after releasing their debut album like the Propellerheads did.
None of Homework was "stolen" from 70s records.
I can go on but for fuck's sake their influences were from Detroit techno and Chicago house, stfu

Wisconsin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Electrotek

None of Homework was "stolen" from 70s records.

---

i posted like 3 really old videos on my fb a while ago where each song had the main riff 100%. They absolutely use samples and its not a big deal or anything to hide. if anything its celebrating the original source. if i could figure out how to use search on time line id find then vids and post them here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by psychic friend

i posted like 3 really old videos on my fb a while ago where each song had the main riff 100%. They absolutely use samples and its not a big deal or anything to hide. if anything its celebrating the original source. if i could figure out how to use search on time line id find then vids and post them here.

---

This one, Dani?

no but that is pretty neat

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedHotSgtPeppers

This one, Dani?

---

This is a good website for finding out about sampling. Check out the Orb's Little Fluffy Clouds.
http://www.whosampled.com/

Personally I want them to come back because of everything I have heard about their 2006 performance. I was not there, so I would like to see what they would do all these years later. That is just me though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Electrotek

They didn't go away after releasing their debut album like the Propellerheads did.
None of Homework was "stolen" from 70s records.
I can go on but for fuck's sake their influences were from Detroit techno and Chicago house, stfu

---

I don't recall ever claiming that they went away after their first album.

Most of Homework was absolutely stolen, Da Funk coming to mind immediately, others I'd have to look up.

Saying that someone was influenced by Detroit Techno and Chicago House instead of disco is like saying that somebody was influenced by 1969 rock instead of 1968 rock. Techno and House were direct evolutions of disco, if you don't understand that you're out of your goddamn mind.

Plus none of their samples are from those genres. Their samples are all from 70s soul/funk/disco acts.

this is a waste of server space.