Daft Punks's "Discovery" : Classic or Dud

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecv1AbcHvbM

here's a shitty full album recreation someone put on youtube and at least some of the youtube comments didn't realise that's what it was lol. kinda fascinating as a project though

I'd relistened to Discovery a month ago for the first time in full in nearly 20 years and jesus does it hold up well. Non stop bangers.

The only "sample" on Discovery that wasn't actually a sample that I can think of, was when multiple sources back in the day cited that Voyager sampled Oliver Cheatham's "Get Down Saturday Night". That one I'm pretty sure was merely influenced by it.

Supertramp example is another one cited just upthread

my local shop had a copy of this for $19.99 and now they're listed on Discogs for $170 fuck offfffffff

I still have the CD I bought in 2001 <3

Here’s a better recreation for One More Time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sdtOpE_3aQ

Here’s a recreation of Face to Face using Evil Woman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iWl8n9wxlA

Also using Alan Parsons and Kenny Loggins in there.

Those are new to me I had no idea those were sampled in there too, but it sounds legit when you hear the result

High Life sample is also Tavares and it does sound sampled not replayed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5uMctGxJwI

They’re pretty ingenious samples I’ll give them that.

I have no idea how people even found them if not confirmed by DP themselves.

Face To Face video is great, ta

I love that they got Todd edwards to do straight ahead vocals over the dreamiest Todd edwards pastiche

High Life sample is also Tavares and it does sound sampled not replayed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5uMctGxJwI

― ✖✖✖ (Moka), Wednesday, February 24, 2021 11:15 AM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

If they weren’t cleared they weren’t samples. They would have been sued into oblivion ages ago if someone else’s master recordings were included

Maybe they did some in the dark clearances but I’d suggest they recreated specific moments

As someone who owns a recording of Guy-Manuel and Thomas playing straight-forward rock instruments with extremely sub- to average talent, I'm rather amazed at these "oh if they said so then they must have replayed these complicated funk and disco licks that they purposely obscured heavily via cut-up then pitched/phased and reassembled" takes.

They were 18 years old when Darlin' was around, if that's what you're alluding to/humblebragging about. They could have learned more skills than that afterwards, surely.

just look at what time and success has done for maron's guitar playing

*have done. i went back and added time to acknowledge it has taken some time.

^^ human after all

As someone who owns a recording of Guy-Manuel and Thomas playing straight-forward rock instruments with extremely sub- to average talent, I'm rather amazed at these "oh if they said so then they must have replayed these complicated funk and disco licks that they purposely obscured heavily via cut-up then pitched/phased and reassembled" takes.

― Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli)

This is my take too. I don’t doubt there are recreations in here but judging by some of the videos above I think those are just samples that are so heavily chopped and edited that they got away with it.

what d-40 is saying is that they recreated the samples and chopped them up but I mean who cares imo

The process of finding the samples, cutting them up, then recreating them perfectly so they can be cut up again just to skip out on some sampling royalties would have been one hell of a task.

I'm sure the majority of these are samples and most of them got cleared. Perhaps some licensers stipulated they needed crediting while others didn't.

When did sample lawyering really come into play? It's not like Paul's Boutique comes with a big long list of tracks the Dust Brothers sampled. But I seem to remember the 2ManyDJs album (which I think came out a year after Discovery) causing a bit of a stir in that sphere of music law, with a whole lot of things being very difficult if not impossible to clear.

I mean, if I'm correct (and it's just vaguely remembered half-conjecture here), it would be no coincidence that sample-based music peaked in the late-90s, with much fewer artists mining the vaults for sounds to reconstruct from roughly the 2000s onwards

Transmitting Live From Mars was 1989, same year as Paul's Boutique, and I Need A Haircut was 1991. Sample Some of Disc, Sample Some of D.A.T. came out in 1993, and could have set a great precedent if actually done well.

There are or were producers who would recreate (or attempt to recreate) samples as a service. No idea if that's what they did here. I suppose it depends on how visible your record is, and who owns the copyright. That album by Ptak1 is made almost entirely from samples but it's all Polish / East European pop and prog records and probably didn't sell enough to be worth chasing up royalties.

As someone who owns a recording of Guy-Manuel and Thomas playing straight-forward rock instruments with extremely sub- to average talent, I'm rather amazed at these "oh if they said so then they must have replayed these complicated funk and disco licks that they purposely obscured heavily via cut-up then pitched/phased and reassembled" takes.

― Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli), Wednesday, February 24, 2021 1:10 PM (four hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

what 'complicated funk and disco licks' lol they're mostly not very complicated

The process of finding the samples, cutting them up, then recreating them perfectly so they can be cut up again just to skip out on some sampling royalties would have been one hell of a task.

record labels do this w/ rapper mixtape beats every single day

Not new, either - Rapper’s Delight had Positive Force playing the Chic Good Times backing in a reasonable facsimile rather than editing a loop, after which Sugarhill assembled a house band to back their rappers. The Tackhead players pulled off a total soundalike of the Incredible Bongo Band’s cover of Apache without any Ableton filters. Dr Dre had a stable of session dudes to replay sources in his heyday, sometimes to save on mechanical royalties, sometimes for ease of getting a clean backing to work with.

if they said so then they must have replayed these complicated funk and disco licks that they purposely obscured heavily via cut-up then pitched/phased and reassembled

I’m agnostic on whether they did or not, but “the samples have been so heavily treated that you can’t tell what they are” is also not a strong argument that they weren’t replayed!

I love that they got Todd edwards to do straight ahead vocals over the dreamiest Todd edwards pastiche

pretty sure he was involved in the production on said pastiche too

he's credited for additional production but maybe that's just to do with recording and toddifying his vocal

hmm maybe it is! for some reason I thought he was just credited for the vocals

https://64.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbym1c4JMR1rrlrnjo1_500.gif

if anyone here hasn't seen interstella 5555 before... you should.... here it is https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x3pj0fa

ooh thanks, can't believe I haven't. I was obsessed with Discovery and remember the "we're gonna do a video for every song" claim, which seemed ridiculous, and then never knew til more recently they'd pulled it off!

I don’t know much about the law behind it but, regardless of royalties I don’t understand how replicating a sample instead of sampling directly gets some sort of free pass on having to clear or credit the original artist. A cover still needs to be credited, and if the argument is that in such small snippets credit doesn’t matter then why not sample directly?

I don’t get it. Either you don’t give credit to heavily altered samples - direct or replicas - or you give credit to both.

As an artist I’d be offended if I heard a replica of a thing I made without credit, than if I did get a credit even if I get no pay at all.

I know there’s some weird “don’t snitch on samples” culture but it’s 2021 now. No matter how obscure or modified your sample if you’re a mildly popular artist someone on the internet will id it in less than a week after your album is out.

the argument is that in such small snippets credit doesn’t matter then why not sample directly

iirc if you directly use the original recording you're still supposed to pay for it even it's a small enough sample where you wouldn't have to pay for using part of the 'songwriting' because it's just melodies that are really copyrightable in that way, so if you replicate those instead that means you can avoid having to pay anything

something like that anyway

like there's two issues with copyright & sampling: using parts of someone else's recording, and using parts of someone else's songwriting. with samples that are just small fragments the second doesn't really apply but the first still does

If they weren’t cleared they weren’t samples. They would have been sued into oblivion ages ago if someone else’s master recordings were included

Maybe they did some in the dark clearances but I’d suggest they recreated specific moments

― ILX’s bad boy (D-40), Wednesday, February 24, 2021 12:56 PM (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

In the Clubhouse discussion that got posted on one of these threads, Todd Edwards talks about the recording process of “Face to Face,” and he talks about stringing together samples from a bunch of different records but doesn’t mention anything being re-recorded. They may have layered on top of samples in some instances to thicken the parts in the mix but I don’t think it was possible for Daft Punk to fully recreate these samples so faithfully. They don’t have ‘70s session chops and they were working out of a home studio.

In the air / Golf / In the air / Golf / In the air

I'm guessing crut is right. You're not good ng to assemble a whole seventies funk revue to recreate 0.3 seconds of music. I mean, maybe people do this, but I just can't see it happening with DP at that time

going. This phone

this record is hugely open hearted…no amount of gallic chin-stroking crate digger machinations truly affects that…since Monday, my four year old and I have been listening to it while driving to day care, and she loves it…although she thinks Romananthony sounds very tired on "One More Time," I guess because of some of the exhalation audible on the recording…

I think One More Time is the only weak link on the whole thing. Other than that, it's just a hoot from start to finish (and I take it back about Too Long, it's perfect)

Actually think it opens with the two weakest tracks - I didn't even bother to check out the album until "Digital Love" got released. I've grown to enjoy "One More Time" and "Aerodynamic" more, but the other 12 tracks are still better

alright, maybe not "Nightvision"

weak????

"One More Time" is just too real for a lot of people

when I first heard "One More Time" as a kid I could barely tell it apart from Eiffel 65 or Fatboy Slim but now I love it