Talk:Alive 2007/Archive 1

Archive 1

unknown track!

i need to know this track, its the guitar in the start of burnin/too long. its sampled from a song, but i cant figure it out and its killing me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.147.220 (talk) 04:53, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

I believe that would be from Daft Punk's track "Voyager". just64helpin (talk) 10:01, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

WHAT it?!

I'm sorry, this has probably been asked before, but in the 2nd track of the album, when they're playing the remix of Tecnologic, is there a part where they keep saying F*** it f*** it over and over again? Or is that just what it sounds like? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.135.101.78 (talk) 16:39, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is "fuck it". The LED screen at the live shows also flashed "FUCK" in time with the music. just64helpin (talk) 17:01, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Why...just...WHY?! Daft Punk has been like %99 percent family friendly until this. I know, this was never geared towards families at all, but now I'm going to feel uncomfortable playing it around my parents...and, how the heck did it get away with not having the "explict lyrics" logo on it 72.135.101.78 (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Remember that article talk pages are provided to coordinate the article's improvement only, and are not for engaging in discussion of off-topic matters not related to the main article. Please do not use this page as a discussion forum for off-topic matters. - kollision (talk) 05:38, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Fun fact: It's just the "fa" from "fax it" (or maybe the "fo" from "format it") mashed with the "ock it" of "(un)lock it". A little messing around in Audacity proves it. I actually was able to make it sound more like "fuck it" than it does in Alive 2007 this way. I always thought they were saying "flop it".--Remurmur (talk) 10:50, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Voyager, not Phoenix

That dude made a mistake, it's definitely Voyager. NOT Phoenix. --James599 (talk) 14:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

It contains elements of "Voyager" and "Phoenix". Please keep in mind that it's "Burnin' and Phoenix", not "Burnin' with Phoenix". Just64helpin (talk) 15:09, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I can't hear anything from Phoenix at all. Can you specify which part is incorporated into that song? Because Phoenix is basically 1 sample, 1 bassline and a drum loop. --James599 (talk) 16:52, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The Alive 2007 track "Aerodynamic Beats/Forget About the World" contains the "clickity clackaty" (as phrased in the reference) percussion sound from "Phoenix". It's starts around 2:18 in "Aerodynamic Beats/Forget About the World" if you're curious. Just64helpin (talk) 17:02, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I see what you mean now. Well, thanks for clearing that up. Cheers! --James599 (talk) 19:39, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Alive 2007/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll be doing the GA review for this article. There are some basic things missing from this article that I think should be added before I will continue with the review:

• Critical reaction: who liked it and who didn't
• Sales
• Citation formatting: web sources need authors, publishers, and dates if available
• What made them want to do a live album instead of a studio album?

The article will remain on hold for one week to address these questions. Nikki311 18:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

What? I can understand general reception being needed in the article, sales, and other stuff...but what made them want to do a live album? They haven't toured in years. Coachella was their first US performance in 8 years (supposedly) and their last tour as a group was in 1997. Ugh. Douglasr007 (talk) 02:00, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The info about what would make them want to do a studio album isn't mandatory...just a suggestion. The other three are mandatory. Nikki311 19:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The seven days are up and not enough progress has been made for me to pass the article. Please finish carrying out my suggestions and feel free to renominate at WP:GAN. Thanks. Nikki311 22:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

pads

i am taking out the "two Lemur pads" part where it says "The four Voyager units, two Behringer mixers and two Lemur pads allowed Daft Punk to "mix, shuffle, trigger loops, filter, distort samples, EQ in and out, transpose or destroy and deconstruct synth lines". the screens have nothing to do with mixing, shuffling, filtering, etc. just the moogs and behringers. 66.25.12.225 (talk) 23:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

AbsolutePunk.net Review

I removed this review, because it's very badly written. Scroll down and read the comments below it; the users definitely agree. --James599 (talk) 01:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

high end comps

please site sources that say they used high end computers or it will be removed. oh and for the record every source that talks about their equipment quotes thomas saying they 'used custom made super computers'. again it will be removed it does not cite a source that truthfully states that bit of information on the article. thank you. 66.25.12.225 (talk) 04:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Moog

I urge that you keep the RME (rack mount edition) part after where it says moog voyager as its useful information and is correct rather than just saying theyre using moog voyagers. thank you. 66.25.12.225 (talk) 03:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Please cite sources for your contributions, or they may be removed. Thank you. Just64helpin (talk) 04:01, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

i did. the RME's can be seen in the photos and are explained in detail. 66.25.12.225 (talk) 04:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Booklet?

My copy, and my friends copy contained no 50 image booklet. Where is this hidden booklet, and did it exist at all? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.89.227 (talk) 06:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The book is included with the 2-disc special edition. Just64helpin 12:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I think that the UK only got the 2cd+book version; i can only find that one on UK sites anyway (amazon.co.uk lists a 1cd, but it is "import"). Because of the fancy build of it, there arent enough to go around, and they are sold out on many sites, with third-party sellers listing them pretty expensive, or just the us 1cd.

SORRY! didnt sign above --82.71.13.254 16:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• ahem* wasnt signed in... --03crichardson 16:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

one long track

is the album just one track, like alive 97?--24.109.218.172 (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

All signs point to "no". Just64helpin (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

It has seperate tracks but it's a gapless album. Jonfin826 (talk) 11:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Unknown track/sample

Does anyone know what the sample or track is at 0:30 on track four, "Too Long" / "Steam Machine"? It's been driving me mad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Milkclub (talk • contribs) 22:40, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

If I'm following the question correctly, that would be the vocal from "Too Long" mixed with new material. Just64helpin (talk) 23:00, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Confusing

is this a 2007 concert or 2006 one? saying "The Alive 2007 performance is an expansion of Daft Punk's 2006 live set." makes it sound like its the 2006 concert.--Neckbelowup 22:16, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

The Alive 2007 tour on its on is an update to what the 2006 tour was. The 2007 tour includes tweaks and the encore. Douglasr007 22:38, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe I've clarified this in my editing. Just64helpin 22:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Leak

Guys, please stop edit warring. Firstly, the WP:ALBUM style guideline is just that ... a guideline, without hard-and-fast rules. Secondly, things don't need to perfect right now ... we can wait, or at least engage in discussion. Ixlikextoxdansex, one concern raised is that the information is unsourced. Where did you find out that the album was leaked? --Iamunknown 01:31, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

It's possible that the "leak" is being confused with an amateur bootleg recording of a live show. A cited source independent of download sites is especially needed in this case. Just64helpin 01:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

No, stating the album has been leaked is not needed AT ALL per WP:ALBUM#Leak. Douglasr007 01:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting that it be immediately added if a reliable, published source is found. I'm explaining why it was removed in the first place, and why it is potentially inaccurate. Just64helpin 02:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

... is WP:ALBUM#Leak or is it not a guideline? If so, it is, as "guidelines" are described in the "Policies and guidelines" policy, "...not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception." Right now might be a good time to have an exception... --Iamunknown 02:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

it is not leaked the leak is of the 2006 concertOhnoes09 21:35, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

That still needs a source, though. Just64helpin 21:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of sources, I purchased Alive 2007 recently, and it is definitely different to the bootleg I downloaded before the release date. 203.213.232.123 (talk) 01:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Pre-Order?

Does anyone have any idea if there is a way to pre-prder a copy? If so, please post a link on this entry, thanks alot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zincyams (talk • contribs) 17:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose merging Alive 2006/2007 (tour) into Alive 2007 (live album). Information about the tour can be covered in the album article, and the two articles already cover much of the same information, such as the tracks performed, Daft Punk's live setup and reaction to the tour. Popcornfud (talk) 15:59, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Support Seems like a no-brainer. It does not have to be a full 1:1 merge as I think the list of tour dates might be considered WP:IINFO - the essential info is the tour, the added encore, and that the Alive 2007 moniker was applied retroactively. – The Grid (talk) 21:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Keep Both articles are notable by themselves, featuring a good number of secondary sources, as well as the Alive 2006/2007 article being rated high-importance on WikiProject Concerts. I also have doubts that the merged article would be easy to navigate. Miklogfeather (talk) 19:10, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

• Keep: The two articles are independently notable, with the tour being a significantly covered and acclaimed series of concerts (see WP:NCONCERT), and the album being a significantly covered and Grammy Award-winning recording (see WP:NALBUMS). —Matthew - (talk) 17:54, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

  The problem is that both articles contain almost the same information. Popcornfud (talk) 19:28, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

  There's some overlap, but the two are still separate subjects that warrant their own articles, with each meeting WP:GNG (see WP:NOTMERGE). I don't think that merging them would be an improvement in any substantial way. —Matthew - (talk) 07:24, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

  Can you explain which parts should be unique to each article? I am not seeing anything in the current tour article that doesn't also make perfect sense in the album article: the equipment used, the setlist, Daft Punk's intent for the shows, etc.

  The issue emerges from the fact that, in effect, the tour was a series of identical shows, and the album is one of those shows. So almost everything we write about one also applies to the other.

  I think the situation is similar to Music Sounds Better With You. Both the song and the band (Stardust) are notable, but the entire story can be covered sufficiently in one article; if we split them (as we once did), the articles would simply duplicate information. That's currently the case with our Alive articles. Popcornfud (talk) 08:40, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

  Initially, I was going to say that the reception of each is and should be unique to each article. But upon further consideration, with the example you provided of Music Sounds Better with You, I'm going to change my vote to support the merger.

  Additional note: in regards to the information that I originally thought should stay unique to each article (found respectively in the "Critical reception" section in the album article, and the "Legacy" section in the tour article), I think that it, if the articles are merged, should be placed under a section heading of "Reception and legacy". —Matthew - (talk) 14:12, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

  Good grief - that's probably the first person whose mind I've ever changed in a Wikipedia debate! Ha ha. Popcornfud (talk) 14:33, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support: See above conversation. —Matthew - (talk) 14:12, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

It's been a few months and no further voices add to this. It feels we have a consensus to merge, so I have boldly made the changes. Popcornfud (talk) 12:16, 1 July 2022 (UTC)