I hadn’t actually seen this quote from Daft Punk. I don’t want to beat this issue like a low-polygon future Derezzed horse, but I realized I missed a very important quote from Billboard. Bangalter:

We really felt that the computers are not really music instruments, and we were not able to express ourselves using a laptop. We tried, but were not successful.

The problem with the way to make music today, these are turnkey systems; they come with preset banks and sounds. They’re not inviting you to challenge the systems themselves, or giving you the ability to showcase your personality, individuality.

Daft Punk on EDM Producers: ‘They’re Missing the Tools’ [Billboard]

Presets, you say? Fascinating.

Source: Daft Punk Gross Beat, Image-Line News, March 2011

Change the scheme, alter the mood, move the damned knobs on the interface if you don’t like the presets. Maybe the battery was dead on their Bluetooth mouse; I dunno. But hold on a sec: are even presets really sinful, anyway?

Maybe it’s something about famous people that they start projecting what seem to be self-directed criticisms at the rest of the world. Cheer up, guys.

If you’d like to hear the music from the guy who made the preset Daft Punk used, you can. Because when Electroconductor makes music with the presets in Gross Beat, he actually is showcasing his individuality. In turn, though, it doesn’t sound anything like Daft Punk, making this whole argument somewhat … suspect.


The thing about getting to know the programmers and engineers who make music technology is, it gets harder to see them as faceless technology. This is not Stargate. You didn’t dig your DAW out of the sand in Egypt from a UFO crash site, touch its gold-plated, alien surface, and suddenly, eyes glowing blue, have your mind taken over by telepathic beings light years advanced of our puny Earth tech. (Crap, I was a folk singer-songwriter and now I can only make BROSTEP! You, too, will be assimilated!) No, this is stuff made by other musicians. And if you’ve ever heard the demo tracks they make, you know you can make something entirely different with them, entirely your own. (Keith Fullerton Whitman spoke to us rather eloquently about getting to know the folks making the modules in his rig. I see people I know when I use technology.

Of course, the irony here to me is also that, even using a preset pattern verbatim, Daft Punk come up with a Daft Punk song. It’s catchy. It can’t be faked. You could leave the rest of us alone with presets 3 and 5, and we might come up with nothing. And in a way, repeating this melodic pattern embedded in the preset is a weird 21st Century-equivalent of common musical practices from centuries past. Chopin made countless Mazurkas using the same rhythmic “preset”; composers used cantus firmi “presets” and made it their own, and —

Ah. This is a waste of time, isn’t it? Very well; I’ll stop. Because if there’s one danger in laptops, it has nothing to do with squashing creativity, and everything to do with getting involved in time-sucking arguments. That means the best thing you can do is switch off all your Internet-connected devices in the studio. Done.

  • daptfunk

    I think Daft Punk has always been bad at expressing themselves in words. Both their interviews and scarce lyrics have always been rather cringe inducing. But they are very eloquent in rhythm, melody, and perhaps most of all, timbre.

    What you bring up reminds me of Robot Rock. They pretty much took someone elses song (Breakwater/Release the Beast), verbatim, and added two vocoded words. What’s interesting, of course, is that the two songs are still utterly different. And, in my opinion, Robot Rock is vastly better than Release the Beast.

    It appears to me that RAM was made in a similar way. They invited some musicians to jam around some ideas they had. It also seems they didn’t write the lyrics or melodies for many of the songs. Yet, the result is distinctly Daft Punk.

    This makes me happy. It seems like a very liberating relationship to music, even though they seem incapable to express it in interviews.

    • http://pkirn.com/ Peter Kirn

      Yeah, the more I think about it, the more it makes sense that presets would have rhythmic and melodic content that other people abused and reused in creative ways, just as musical ideas are exchanged. Somehow, this gives me a different idea about creating presets, as well.

    • Gwydion

      Presets with rhythmic and melodic content – did you see this one already…



  • Freeks

    Like using latest presets would be a new thing.. How many billion tracks had DX7 electric piano sound in the eighties? Or some of the other presets that defined the era.

    RAM is probably art project that includes all these interviews. He do have a point where he says that big artists do not even try to push boundaries like they did in the past. But if some bigger artist would do something like Dark Side Of the Moon in 2013 they would be laughed on as being artsy fartsy. Not the best times for new music where “new” music is Trap or Moombathon that are actually same old thing with updated sounds/bpm.

    Skillerx didn’t use presets, but he’s sound defined the next presets for others 😉

    • Stacey Miles

      Skrillez didn’t use presets ? Skrillez sounds like one giant NI Massive Demo and he needs to start using other oscillator waveforms besides the talking head preset.

    • SkrilleZ

      Skrillez did use presets indeed.

      Nowadays he is so lame twiking the synths that he is byuing samples.

      All his drums are from Prime Loops. Some vocal samples are from Prime Loops. His music theme’s and structure are from P5 Audio, Platinum Loops and one from Loopoholics.

      Did you guys ever question yourself’s why everyone can make SkrilleZ (YES with Z because he used WareZ software found from his two stollen computer during tours from 2009) sounds and why it’s all over youtube?
      People nobody buys that shit and everyone imitates it because yes simple and if you don’t want to make it from scratch just download the sample he uses too.

      SkrilleZ is a joke guys and I found a youtube video some years ago about the guys that stole is computer and all his projects at the time was just a bunch of random samples arranged in a fashionably way.
      EVEN Hanz Zimmer jokes with some of his songs saying the chords are wrong (because his chords does not correspond to the root key).
      EVEN SkrilleZ joked with the Grammy jury for giving him a prize for a song that he don’t even know how to structure (verse, chorus, break, outro, etc)… -> this video is in youtube himself smiling and joking in the 2011 Grammys…

      SkrilleZ it’s all about targeting 12 years kids with words “Call 991”, “kill everybody” and “Oh My God” so kids eventually buy it’s musics because no proper adult listen to that bullshit…


    • Freeks

      You can do better than that. If you have ever made music yourself you know it makes no difference if you have all the same loops and presets he had. you still cannot write a hit.

      All new music is targeted to 12 year old kids. If it’s not then it’s not relevant anymore. Think what you listened when you were 12. I listened AC/DC, Iron Maiden, RUN DMC etc. that were all targetted to 12 year olds. That’s the age when you are into new thing and not hating everything 😀

    • Freels

      Well, he did you some presets in the as the base, but please share the tracks where he copied to super compressed and distorted sounds.

      He did define a sound that billion ppl have copied. That cannot be denied even how much you hate the guy. Sure it has base on what justice did before, but he took it to the extreme.

  • Samuele Cornell

    computers “are not inviting you to challenge the systems themselves, or giving you the ability to showcase your personality ” .
    The same thing could be said for whatever instrument , you have to master it , you have to explore all its sonic possibilities , in order to be able to express successfully yourself.
    The electric guitar and the evolution of its play style for example, it went far beyond the classical ‘presets’ because of experimenting and creativity , because of people willing to explore .
    The computer could be an amazing, uber-versatile instrument but only if you’re not stuck at the surface of what it seems an heartless cold machine by habit.

    Daft Punk critique sounds more sterile than the use of presets, this is sure.

  • vincent

    I think it was dblue Glitch that was used on Derezzed, I remember dblue actually tweeting about being pretty sure they did (the creator should know, right?).. Also Gross Beat came out around the same period as TRON did, they were working on the OST longer than that. Image-Line trying to claim credit/grab attention?

    • http://pkirn.com/ Peter Kirn

      ?? Did you watch the video?

      I’m guessing it’s possible they added dblue Glitch next in the chain for sample resolution reduction, etc.

  • Mokafix

    Well, being French I have to take their defense a bit.

    In HW, how much control the user get is determined by space and cost.
    In SW there is not limit and although this sounds good on paper, it is no big news that sometimes you get more fun and more enjoyable result by playing around some limits, including ones you would have avoided in the first place, as Keith Jarett’s Koln concert proved.

    I think a lot of SW products suffer from feature overload and it is no surprise that some people find it refreshing to go back to some more limited hand-on solutions.

    I remember someone arguing with me on the fact I should not hide any controls from user. My point was : if it is available, no matter how hidden, user will want to tweak it. If i consider some parameter fun/complexity ratio is not satisfying and might lower overall long term user impression of the product, then I hide it.

    I can see the preset dropdown being that one too much control for some people. And I do not think people who do not want the choice at all rather than choosing not to use it are stupid.

    Then again some people do not get overwhelmed by SW and are able to set their own frame before working but I can understand others want more framing to come from the tools so they can go and rely more on intuition, and even be forced to do so.

    • http://pkirn.com/ Peter Kirn

      Oh, there are plenty of valid criticisms of software – plenty of reasons to step away some of the time.

      That doesn’t change the following facts:
      1. This criticism is leveled at *other* producers, in that the question from Billboard was, “A lot of young dance producers cite you as their primary influence. Yet, as you’ve said, there’s a lot of homogeny in “EDM.” What are they missing?”

      2. It doesn’t make any mention of the fact that they used recognizable presets on a track that hit the Billboard *top 10* (Derezzed)

      3. He then claims, “It’s not really a judgment or criticism of any of the music today; rather trying to bring a different point of view and different alternative.”

      And then I think the problem is (reading that whole sentence), claiming that they are experimenting with a fundamentally new form of production is just not true. It isn’t. It’s okay that it isn’t, but it’s not really possible to claim that it is.

      I think the honor of France – and even the honor of Daft Punk – can be intact while pointing that out. 😉

    • mercury

      There is one huge flaw in this post.

      If you listen very carefully, they did not use those exact presets in that video. Similar to Discovery which supposedly contains several samples, if you listen carefully on that album, about half of the presumed samples are not the original versions.

      Presets are ultimately like samples. It’s not that all presets are bad, nor all samples. It is just that if you are going to use them and they are common, you really need to take it further. Otherwise, you are not adding anything. On the other hand, if you find something very obscure, you can often get away with using it as it may bring a new timbre to the music scene.

      What frustrates me and many other producers is hearing endless work, primarily “brostep” or dubstep and its newest variations, where the same 10-20 presets from Massive are used without any attempt to mangle the sound, often time using entire arpeggiated presets as the main leads. In addition to this, it is the actual “sound” itself of several of the new EDM producers which is VERY homogenous. If you listen to Pandora, pick any 60s or 70s band you like. As different artists come on, you will almost immediately recognize them even if you have not heard the songs. On the “EDM” playlists, everything sounds almost the same. There is no signature.

    • http://madameblavatskyoverdrive.com/ Ifthenwhy

      ” It is just that if you are going to use them and they are common, you really need to take it further…..”


    • mercury

      that’s actually a good question. and the real answer to that is you don’t. in fact diddy made several millions looping popular 80s songs.

      i guess my point is there are going to be a lot of people that do not think the Fast and the Furious 6 is in the same league as 2001 or A Clockwork Orange and will rally for directors that make movies like those, or music like the Beatles…the good news is this group of people is slowly disappearing and prob in 20 yrs u won’t have much except for loops of old songs.

      Peter, the presets and that plugin came out after Tron although maybe they had access to it…also the particular preset u are discussing is also a derivative of a preset in lucifer VST. if you listen to the 8th or 9th note there are 2 pitches that are off…if u drag and drop the sample into FL Studio u can actually notice the difference. i haven’t used FL in a while but i will try to find it (i tried reproducing this when i heard about it).

      as a side note, do u feel that playing a melody on a computer keyboard utlizing a VST piano feels the same as playing on a grand piano? it’s a weird question because for me it is good enough, but i don’t think people who understand the subtleties of the piano would agree with me… and i personally hope that those people (traditional musicians) do not disappear!

    • http://madameblavatskyoverdrive.com/ Ifthenwhy

      “..in 20 yrs u won’t have much except for loops of old songs.”

      I dont see any indication of this happening. Quite the opposite actually.

      I do understand your points. But I think that “innovation” should never be a criteria for any creative act. We have tools, we build stuff with the tools. Presets are also tools. Can you show me a time when music wasn’t derivative? I can’t think of an era.

      All Daft Punk’s new album has proven is that they can also be derivative “without using presets” (if that’s even true).

      “i personally hope that those people (traditional musicians) do not disappear!”

      Respectfully, I don’t see any indication of this happening either.


    • mercury

      when i dig i can find excellent musicians and great computer based musicians and artists. i don’t see that in the popular music sphere.

      good comparison is really in regards to what is popular EDM. i think there has been a huge drop in the quality across the board. i don’t know what u r listening to but if u look at the top of the beatport charts u will find a large number of artists who have just taken loops from large loop libraries and add a few modulations and released this as their own work. i don’t remember hearing this as much in the early 90s as it wasn’t that easy to buy large loop samples…metalheadz and roni size were actually at the top of the charts at one point and were exceptional and brought a lot of new techniques to the forefront. the innovation i see now is usually not mainstream and very hard to find as it seems like there are a million new releases every day

      don’t get me wrong, i’m not saying music has degraded, i’m saying the quality of the music that rises to the top and is easy to find has degraded. it is ok if music is derivative, i’m not looking for non-derivative music. it’s just not fun listening to songs again and again that came from the same sample library that everyone uses…and the vast majority of this related to popular EDM which is basically “brostep”

    • mercury

      and btw there is a big difference between a preset (like a sound) and a sampled loop. there is also a big difference in audience as well. not everyone appreciates eno. lot of people love to hear the same sounds again and again and more power to them

    • Scott Fisher

      You can hear the Derezzed version LEFT CHANNEL compared to a recreation (by Madeon) using the Gross Beat presets RIGHT CHANNEL from the default setup, slots 3,4 and 5 here – https://soundcloud.com/fl-studio/daft-punk-derezzed-left-vs we are in no doub’t Gross Beat was used. Gross Beat was released 10-September-2009, well before Tron Legacy. The presets were created by Electroconductor as Peter pointed out (known as nucleon on our forums as he is a member of staff).

      We don’t hear any differences that you mention. You can also download the FL Studio project we used to recreate it here:


      And to get back on topic, to argue about presets is like arguing that Pianists didn’t make their own piano, or tune it even 😉

      Regards Scott.

    • http://pkirn.com/ Peter Kirn

      No, I think they actually did use those exact presets. The variations I hear have to do with the source sound and processing afterward.

      Remember, I’m not saying that their work is equivalent to these other producers. *They’re* saying that – that the fault was the computer, and not the operator.

      In the words of Tron, I believe in the users.

    • Scott Fisher

      Yes they really did use the presets as you can check for yourself here. Derezzed left channel, Gross Beat right channel (thanks to Madeon for recreating the musical phrases to run through Gross Beat) – https://soundcloud.com/fl-studio/daft-punk-derezzed-left-vs

  • Random Chance

    I feel that the problem lies always with the people who shun the use of presets. Talking from my perspective, I don’t like to use presets because I feel that I could just as well created the sound myself and it would somehow been my own (yeah, what a delusion with room for many philosophical discussions about creativity, creative expession, intellectual property and so on). If I think about it I get angry, not at myself for using presest (heaven forbid that I should find fault with me and my thinking!), but at the machine I use: “It made me use a preset because using a preset is so much easier than finding and performing the magic sequence of steps to initialize everything to zero as it were. Some pieces of hardware or software make it harder than others to start from scratch. And I’d include modular synths in the harder category as well because once a patch or two are set you might just as well tweak it just a little bit to get what you want instead of rearranging the patch or going through the motions to unplug every single cable prior to playing a note (or whatever you had in mind).

    There’s also the kind of pressure that others exert on you while working with music technology: “Isn’t there a preset for that?”, “Suchandsuch had a preset for this sound that sounded really great.”, “Don’t you have any sounds? Why must you fiddle with cables and knobs? This is not (electronic) music production!” on top of less vocal expressions of boredom or anger at the slow pace of progress while creating a sound or a musical pattern. Faced with such a situation one might very well be inclined to stick to presets where at all possible while still being frustrated, albeit for a different reason.

  • lokey

    ive never seen much of a difference between loading up a preset and walking into a guitar shop and buying a premade guitar. sure, theres real honor in building your own instrument, but its no the end of the process, you need to play something expressive with it to make music. does anyone look down on jimi hendrix because he didnt build his own guitar, before rocking out and lighting it on fire?

  • Doktor Fist

    Daft Punk is commercialized tripe, yes – but the more interesting development here is how much personal offense is taken by their very existence and its related accoutrement, however pedantic such effluvia may be

    the lady doth protest too much, methinks

    huzzah and carry on

  • Alec Brady

    Default presents are the new cantus firmi. What a great comparison! I really liked this article.

  • Radiophobic

    The new daft punk album frustrates me a little bit, as it seems they have hit that point where they don’t find themselves inspired to make music, and are doing it for a paycheck. Ends up being good on the radio, the top 40 club, as filler in compilation albums and soundtracks. I wonder how they would have responded to the same questions 12 years ago after they released discovery.

  • Theta_Frost
  • experimentaldog

    Last I remember the Piano was still being composed for and it’s quite the preset timbre. Are we talking timbre or note sequence presets? Timbre is one thing, but the music also exists beyond its original instrumentation does it not? Alarm Will Sound’s cover versions of Aphex Twin’s music come to mind here. Removed from the context of a recorded medium, all music still exists in the so-called ether. So, if some one were to memorize a song, does this music not also exist beyond its original state? That’s why mechanical copyright licenses are different than composition licenses. Cover versions are a great example of music existing beyond it’s original timbres. It’s quite interesting that presets are in abundance, but loathed by many. It’s as if questions of timbral authorship plague the modern computer composer. Maybe it’s because electronic music’s history is so laden with distinct timbral signatures reaching as far back to musique concrete. Generative patch creation could be a fun solution. NI and Arturia already have some interesting features that do this and aren’t overwhelming. I find generative processes provide some of the most interesting timbral surprises. Pick the presets you like and have the computer generatively surprise you. Then compose with the sounds you like rather than muss and fuss. You can even deal with fine tuning timbres later if the compositional side of your brain doesn’t want to deal with it. I’m building a MaxForLive patch that can generatively load patches from the browser and interpolates between the timbres. I think it would also be interesting if new formats of music were able to embrace the preset but in a different way. By including DSP and software instruments in playback that subtly alter the timbre every time generatively as per the composers input. A music file with built in synths, delays , reverbs and variable sample playback. A medium that includes live software processes to create a music event upon every listen, but is still the same song.

    • Younity

      I have found my own process by engaging the features of a daw (Ableton live in this case) to find a workflow which is albeit relying upon software I did not make, but allows me to choose when and where to add my touches.

      Audio re-sampling in Live is a god send.

  • SomeDude

    DP’s sneering at presets is highly hilarious when on a track like “Contact” they just lifted the whole recording from a 70’s band named “The Sherbs” and just added an arpeggio over it.’… The nerves…

  • cooptrol

    I usually find this kind of discussion void of purpose. IMHO music is to be made with whatever means, and to be judged only by the stream of feelings provoked ond the listeners. The means of production and the verbalizations of the composers should be taken as some secondary anecdote. Preset or no preset, million dollar budget or home studio, what matters is the result. Of course, there is also the big marketing machine, of which all these explosive declarations are a very effective weapon of controversy and ubiquity on the media. Still, the street man don’t give a fuck about all this and dances happily to Get Lucky or demises it as crap.

  • Sclr

    They just phrased the situation incorrectly, maybe spoke to broadly. You nailed it. They seem to be projecting a bit. And contradicting themselves. We all do it. But we all don’t have session players, plenty of time, massive studios or the money to see it all play out in the media, or publicly. To me it seems a little like betraying your past…
    If they start saying ‘what other artists are doing with computers is garbage’ then i would have to say they are full of shit.
    I have recently stepped OTB and started using hardware again to make music but the flow hasn’t changed extremely. If i hadn’t done everything itb before i never would have the vision i needed to go forward in the direction i have been lately. And I’ll still use computers/software/apps to master and prep my compositions before after and inbetween. After all it sounds good to me and its affordable.

  • Jon Johnson

    The best take home of this read is turning off your Internet connection. Most of us get sucked into just chatting our valuable lifetime away wishing, talking, arguing, about stuff, not to mention Facebook sucking time away.

    • http://pkirn.com/ Peter Kirn

      Alternatively, turn on the Internet only to read this site, which I promise will be endlessly musically inspiring and lead to a happier, more productive creative life. 😉

  • Yanakyl

    I noticed they generally say “we noticed”, “we tried”, “we were not able”, speaking of their own experience.

    I’m no daft punk but I have similar problem with computer as the instrument, I don’t know why but it just seems to turn my brain down. Over the years I’ve noticed that the rare cases where I use a soft synth I tend to directly resample the output of me noodling around with paramters and effects and keep it as a sample, or I’m just adding one sound here and there to something that is almost finished.
    Not talking about effects and mixing, where I do pretty much everything in ableton….

    Then I guess some people get things done in a totally different fashion and I’d say good for them!!! As long as they enjoy doing it and get inspiration then its fine, like daft punk had the opportunity to occupy studios for years and invite who they wanted to make an album so they did it. They probably had a really good time and made something new(as an experience not talking about the music). And for the music…I like it not all of it but mostly, and some stuff is amazing!!

  • D@rth T@ter

    In a world of Justin Biebers and Carly Rae Jephsons (neither of whom have contributed anything of any value to popular music…unlike Daft Punk) this is nothing but another sad nerd pissing fest. What is it about alternative musicians that they feel the desperate compulsion to drag down any of their number who receive broad appreciation? There must be something more useful to blog about rather than a tired debate about the use of presets (someone sue that crash cymbal!)

    The obsession with ‘worthy’ music making process is an equally worthwhile, and in this instance, bitchy and pointless focus.

    • derin devlet

      You really think there’s much difference between beiber Jepsen and daft punk? Oh please. It’s all pop music. Daft may be the a actual producers of thier songs and not just the singers as in the case of the other two, but virtually all of thier so G’s are just lifted chunks of past hits. Literally midi files of full sections of hit
      Songs. At least Jepsen produced a completely new track.
      Another one is timbaland. He was criticized for using a chiptune track he stole but many don’t realize that almost all his hit songs were from a middle eastern midi disc playing classic Arab songs with modern synth sounds and generic hip hop beats. There’s a few great YouTube videos exposing him for this.

    • D@rth T@ter

      “At least Jepsen produced a completely new track.”

      Oh please.

    • wingo shackleford

      I wouldn’t be so quick to dismiss Carly Rae Jepsen. Call me Maybe was a #1 hit and all over the place for quite a while. We’ll see about her staying power as a performer, but the dude that produced that track usually plays all the instruments and is fairly prolific.

    • D@rth T@ter

      I suggest you now listen to the one he produced for her with lyrics provided by Coke and their twitter followers. That will fix you.

  • gLOW-x

    It remembers me Aphex Twin pretending he didn’t used any computer on an album. After that, he praised IRCAM tools….and may be didn’t even used them on a track.
    Do what i say, but don’t do what i do. Reality is they use the same tools we all use (HW,SW,controllers…).
    Next time, they will pretend to have coded their own plugins, soldered their own synths/effects…

    PS : Daft Punk is more and more just boring endless loops.

  • Charlie

    I’m glad to see I wasn’t the only one who read that line in the article and thought that Daft Punk has clearly gone insane.
    I don’t think that DP is against presets–they are against *other* people using presets. In reality, presets don’t necessarily make or break a song…they are just a tool, and you can use them correctly, or incorrectly.
    What I see behind that Daft Punk statement is a fear of their music being easier to make than it used to be. Gone are the days of sitting in your basement writing settings in secret code on your basement walls so that nobody steals them. I think it speaks more for how they perceive their own creative ability than anything else. I am not saying Daft Punk is bad, but I think that they are coming into a newer era of music-making that they might be a little afraid of. I play bass primarily, and I remember when Guitar Hero came out and it sparked a lot of interest in people to take up guitar because it was so easy in the game, and I knew a lot of musicians who really took offense to that. They don’t realize that it’s hard to play *good* guitar (if it was easy, we’d all be stars).
    Heck, when Daft Punk and EDM started to go mainstream, a lot of guitar players, bass players and drummers were upset at the ease of sequencing music and how synths “were cheating” because you had perfect timing, and on-key playing, and the drummers never had to hitch a ride with the bass player to get a gig because both the bass and drum were machines that the DJ took to the gig. I bet pianists were mad as all get-up when the player piano came out.
    Daft Punk just showed their age, that’s all…

  • Genjutsushi

    Its ok everyone.. Joe Jeremiah has ‘fixed’ Random Access Memories with some excellent 8bit skills http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Yjw595chVgQ#!

  • http://madameblavatskyoverdrive.com/ Ifthenwhy

    I pretty much only use presets. Maybe I’ll tweak the sound a bit to best serve a song, but for the most part a “good” preset is a sound that is already considered for a specific use. It’s beautiful utility.

    Those Mellotron “presets” didn’t seem to bother the Beates all that much did they?

    I dont want to be a sound designer. I really truly respect them, but for me that aspect of contemporary music making is akin to watching grass grow.

    So yeah, Daft Punk’s inference that Presets somehow lack “authenticity” or dont challenge the musician enough is really just elitism. It’s part of their contextual frame that they are putting around the new album.

  • THATguy

    So much butthurt over this album and press around it. It’s funny. I’m not passionate about my feelings for their new album, which are positive. I like it just because, when everyone expected (or wanted) them to come out with something super synthetic and envelope-pushy (making up words here), they gave everyone the flip and came out with something all the way at the other end of the spectrum. In this age of oneupmanship, where computer technology has made it easier for everyone to make a bigger, Skrillex-bassline-riddled banger, or catchier Swedish House-drama-chord infested dancefloor anthem than the next person, it seems they just said “f*** this. Let’s just take it down a few notches and make something musical.” And I think they succeeded at that.

    Calm down, everyone. Jeez.

  • Powersv2

    Shattering the walls on a song I love. WHYYYYYYY. haha

  • adam

    must be a misquote. most idiotic thing for such musicians to say, right??

  • Dwarf

    If they think that using presets was rubish and sucking all their creativity and such, blablabla, so why they use Nile Rodgers very own stratocaster signature sound, Chilly Gonzalez using the very sames timbres he uses to, as well as the other guests standard sounds? Everything, or almost, in pop, rock, electronic, is a preset, a staple, a standard, a classic, a cliche, and so on. Why do you need a Fender Stratocaster, why do you need a tr808, why do you need this or that analog keyboard, or a Fender Precision Bass? why do you need to mike the drums like they did on the Disco era? Aren’t they presets, cliches? Or are they classic timbrs? They used this cliches, and without many of them, they wouldnt have been able to (re)build the sound they had in their mind, would they?

  • qidelephant

    This is funny because I remember finding out that one of Daft Punk’s early tunes I liked was basically just something sampled from an old record, hardly changed at all… can’t remember which tune it was…

  • patrick

    I know this is a month old article but I’ve come back to it 2 or 3 times and decided to comment, albeit late.

    As someone who has been writing instruments/tools using max/msp for 10+ years and getting reaktor recently to build tools from scratch in my DAW I’m angry about the “presets” comments. Computers will do whatever you want them to do. You just have to learn to do it.

    I hate what electronic music has become post EDM branding as much as Daft Punk but don’t blame the computer There have always been presets, although with old moogs and arps they were in a book and you had to turn the knobs yourself. Just as today they were a guide or starting point to help you learn the capabilities of the instrument.

    I’ve read this 2 or 3 times mostly because it’s inspiring to hear someone who inspired me in the past, to take up electronic music as a hobby, essentially deride the greatest musical instrument ever made (it’s a studio, a notebok, a publishing platform, and can make just about any sound imaginable) as missing the magic of old studios. I went to sound school and learned on a neve and cut tape and even worked for nothing at 2 big name studios before getting a job in graphic design. Ask the assistant engineer who does most of the day to day grunt work for peanuts about the nostalgia of the 70s. My macbook can ride in the front seat to studio b and I don’t have to have a hernia operation after…but I digress. What I’m trying to say is I take their comments as a challenge. In a day when computers have democratized music you have to go deep into the machine to impart soul…not abandon it.

    and lokey who made the Jimmi Hendrix comment, You have seen the picture
    of him with his soldering gun? he didn’t build his guitar but he knew
    the inner workings, how to tune it, what amps to pair it with to give
    it his signature sound as well as how to play it. Hendrix guitar is not a preset.

  • jonahblock

    aren’t presents like using different guitar pedals?