Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Daft Punk Created One of Their Most Famous Samples

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–98 of 98 posts

Re: How Daft Punk Created One of Their Most Famous Samples

#91

Post by justinator »

bch wrote: post #60
rhizome wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Readymades were a Duchamp thing completely. Warhol was influenced by them (and Duchamp in general), but he didn't call his work by that term, regardless of similarities in method or concept. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Readymades_of_Marcel_Duchamp

It's been a long time since, I read it, but in Bob Colacello's biography[1][2], I thought he mentioned that Warhol did create (or at least _refer to_) items as "ready made art", without (if I recall correctly) reference to Duchamp. But I could be mistaken. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Colacello [2] http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Terror-Andy-Warhol-Close/dp/08154...

Warhol would do things like mass-produce objects that looked very much like other things, example: screen printed Brillo Boxes - and then photograph them in say, a super market. It's similar, but different - Duchamp, as the story goes, would just buy the object and call it art. There's some controversy over that, as some of these Found Objects aren't so commonplace, but have key differences in them, to make them more aesthetically pleasing - they may be actually one-ofs, that only look like something commonplace and mass-produced, giving Duchamp the last laugh. That's what happens, when a chess player starts makin' art!

Also see the Warhol's Campbell Soup cans - he just really liked Campbell tomato soup. Speaking of canned things, see, Piero Manzoni's "Canned Shit", where, well, it's what it says on the tin, I guess. I guess, as I haven't actually opened one, myself,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artist%27s_Shit

Warhol would use many different mass-production (cheap!) techniques to produce his art. One of my favorites is xerox'd photographs of flowers, he would almost give away for free - certain that they would be both collectable, and that people would simply throw them away, because hey: it's just some cheap photocopy. The one's that survive are worth quite a bit. Incidentally, he didn't get the copyright to the original photograph, so lost money on the whole thing.

I think warhol's biggest, "Readymades" were the actors of his films, who would get little, if any direction and they would just film them doing their thing. See, "Chelsea Girls"

> Justin, (author of Dada Mail)

Re: How Daft Punk Created One of Their Most Famous Samples

#92

Post by thristian »

granfalloon wrote: post #12
WA wrote: post #6

On a side note: How does the whole legal process work? I mean, the original tracks, or at least parts of it, are taken from a song and re-sampled to create something new. So far so good. But is everybody allowed to do it or do you have to ask the original creator for permission, especially if you want to use the new sample in/as commercial products?

You need to get permission from the copyright holder, which has gotten substantially more expensive over the years. Hip hop tracks back in the 80s and early 90s used to contain loads of different samples all mashed together, but it slowed down a bit after people started suing. Nowadays sampling isn't quite as popular, and sampled tracks don't usually use more than one or two samples. The rapper Fabolous had a hit son…

For other people who were as curious as I was:

"Breathe" by Fabolous: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8zRiaLOkfc

"Crime of the Century" by Supertramp: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLcHStXAaNg (the sampled bit seems to start about 2:07)

Re: How Daft Punk Created One of Their Most Famous Samples

#94

Post by arrrg »

sthatipamala wrote: post #67
WiseWeasel wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, surprisingly, using an acronym like "The Fucking Article" might be construed as rude in certain circles.

TFA often means "the full article", even though the more rude sense is more common elsewhere.

I’m sorry, but you cannot use “TFA” without implying “The fucking article” at least to some degree. That’s just how it is, never mind the intent. If you want to be polite you do not use “TFA”, it’s as simple as that.

Re: How Daft Punk Created One of Their Most Famous Samples

#95

Post by wturner »

mrxd wrote: post #81

The comments on Slate just show how little people understand about the culture of EDM. The debate about whether Daft Punk is "stealing" or passing off other people's work as their own misses the point. Daft Punk (and many other electronic artists) are mainly producers, and it's normal for producers of all kinds of music to hire sessions musicians and record them in the studio. Sampling is just another version of that…

"Daft Punk (and many other electronic artists) are mainly producers, and it's normal for producers of all kinds of music to hire sessions musicians and record them in the studio. Sampling is just another version of that."

This statement assumes they are not sampling other peoples music illegally. The law is based on the argument that if I sample so much as hiss from a record without consent that it is illegal. Why? The reasoning is that said hiss was recorded within a specific set of variables that can never be reproduced ever again in the exact same manner any time 'within the known universe'. Hence if you sample some hiss off a record its because you want that hiss and this is why sampling of other peoples recordings is illegal without consent.

Re: How Daft Punk Created One of Their Most Famous Samples

#96

Post by gotofritz »

arrrg wrote: post #94
sthatipamala wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TFA often means "the full article", even though the more rude sense is more common elsewhere.

I’m sorry, but you cannot use “TFA” without implying “The fucking article” at least to some degree. That’s just how it is, never mind the intent. If you want to be polite you do not use “TFA”, it’s as simple as that.

or you could give the poster the benefit of the doubt and read it as "the featured article". It's your decision how you decide to read it.

Re: How Daft Punk Created One of Their Most Famous Samples

#97

Post by nackerhews »

vanderZwan wrote: post #74
001sky wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Anyone can put a urinal on the wall and call it art" I'm not sure this is too far from the point of duschamp's piece, which is that you can "put anything on a pedastal" and the "sign it", and as long as it's done by someone with a certain "aura", such an act becomes transformative. The "wall" and the "pedastal" need not be taken literally, IMHO. There is a whole "deconstruct the art gallery" theme that followed. Thi…

Oh for gods sake, are we still discussing this? It's been almost a hundred years. Look: > Submitted for the exhibition of the Society of Independent Artists in 1917, Fountain was rejected by the committee, even though the rules stated that all works would be accepted from artists who paid the fee. He was playfully trolling. That's what Dada was all about. Then it caused a stir, and in response to the controversy he d…

> Oh for gods sake, are we still discussing this? It's been almost a hundred years.

Chill out buddy, not all of us were alive in 1917.

Post reply on HN