Of course, some contemporary pop artists have taken the concept of the robot or cyborg quite literally. Such is the case with the French techno duo known as Daft Punk: consisting of Thomas Bangalter (b. 1975) and Guy-Manuel de Homem Christo (b. 1974) Their music usually carries a hint of nostalgia with the utilization of “retro” soundscapes and electronic instruments (eg., reminiscent of the 1970s and 80s).[1] Yet, their work simultaneously remains current through the use of sampling and artificial vocality. Another significant aspect of Daft Punk is their visual appearance during their live concerts. They have been known to frequently perform in robot costumes. This leads some to question if they are human. The visual trickery has worked in Bangalter and Homem-de Christo’s favor. The two have created distinct personas, which boost their fame.
This is not to say that Daft Punk’s music always utilized these diverse elements. Their debut album, Homework (1997) sounds more akin to the dance music of its time.[2] The drastic change in the musical (and visual) approach coincided with the release of their 2001 album, Discovery. In an interview with Chris Gill that same year, Bangalter explained the reason behind their transformation: “…. We did not decide to become robots …. There was an accident in our studio. We were working on our sampler, and exactly at 9:09 a.m. on September 9, 1999, it exploded. When we regained consciousness, we discovered that we had become robots.”[3]
It is this factor of deception that makes Daft Punk intriguing artists. In terms of their treatment of artificial vocality, the synthesized voice serves a significant purpose in Discovery. At times, the voices featured are actually samples of other performers: such as in the opening track, “One More time.” Gill indicates that for this song, Bangalter and de Homem-Christo collaborated with. “…house music heroes Todd Edwards and Romanthony….”[4] The presence of the synthesized voice in “One More Time” is blatantly obvious from the beginning of the dance track/song. It initially enters in short bursts at 0:30-0:32 amid looped trumpets and a funky rhythm section: stating the title of the song. As “One More Time” progresses, the lyrics become slightly more dominant: “One more time/ We’re gonna’ celebrate/ Oh, yeah! All right! / Don’t stop the dancing.’” (1:03-1:10).[5]
By the bridge of the song, however (beginning at 2:21), the rhythm section drops out. The instrumentation leaves the synthesized voice in question paired with electronic keyboard and creates a feeling that time has stopped. The lyrics of “One More Time” seem to contradict this musical idea, as they state: “Mmmm…. No/ We don’t stop/ You can’t stop/ We’re gonna’ celebrate ….” (2:36-2:49).[6]
“Harder Better Faster Stronger,” the fourth track on Discovery, provides an even better example of artificial vocality: despite the fact that it is difficult to tell by listening whether the duo is using a vocoder or similar device. Nonetheless, the song works because it bolsters the “robotic” aspect of Daft Punk. The first six seconds of the song start with what sounds like a rumbling engine, which gradually morphs into a funk beat. Bengalter and Homem-Christo appear later utilizing short and disconnected synthesized speech: “Work it/ Make it/ Do it/ Makes us/ Harder/ Better/ Faster/ Stronger/ More than/Hour/Our/Never/Ever/After/Work is/ Over.” (0:52-1:20).These words eventually begin to connect and form complete sentences as the song moves along (one of the most prominent lines being, “Our work is never over” at 1:47-1:50).[7]
To a certain extent, Daft Punk’s 2013 album entitled Random Access Memories (RAM) continues Bangalter and Homem-Christo’s explorations of artificial vocality and robots. Yet, unlike Discovery, the latter album features a heavier influence of 1970s disco music and technology. Critics have especially noticed the “human” vocal presence on the album through the frequent collaborative tracks.[8] This does not mean that Random Access Memories should be completely discarded because it does feature instances of the synthesized voice. More importantly, it recently won the 2014 GRAMMY for “Album of the Year” and “Record of the Year” for “Get Lucky.”[9]
At its core, RAM is a concept album about a robot’s longing for humanity and love. Several of the thirteen tracks on the album allude to these ideas. In “The Game of Love,” for example, instances of the Talk Box can heard especially. At times, the song reveals an almost emotive quality to the synthesized voice: ”…And it was you/ And it was you/ The one that would be breaking my heart/ When you decided to walk away/ When I wanted you to stay” (2:59-3:22).[10] Themes of humanity and love are also in the song, “Within.” Here, the protagonist expresses confusion and sadness over his condition. The robot in question is tormented by his inability to remember aspects, as he sings in the refrain (1:35-1:53 and 2:45-3:21):
I’ve been for sometime
Looking for someone
I need to know now
Please tell me who I am.[11]
Perhaps an even better example of these concepts can be found in the eight-minute song. “Touch.” A collaboration between Daft Punk and singer/songwriter Paul Williams, “Touch” presents the same theme as “Within” (albeit, from a slightly more positive angle). Although the protagonist could be perceived as a robot, Williams intentionally leaves the lyrics ambiguous. The Introduction of the song opens with a flurry of different electronic timbres, followed by William’s synthesized voice speaking bits of lyrics to the first verse (0:00-1:50). The focal point of the song concentrates on the protagonist’s recollections of touch and emotion. He desires, perhaps in vain, to acquire the same aspects as humans (“Tell me what you see/ I need something more.")
The bridge to “Touch,” by contrast, features the synthesized voices of Bengalter and Homem-Christo (4:28-4:36). Here, the duo provides a response of sorts “Home/ Hold on/ If love is the answer, you’re home.”[12] These lines repeat several times on two different occasions (4:28-5:31 and 6:30-7:42), each time building in intensity accompanied by children’s choir and a frantic orchestra performing string glissandi. The second occurrence ends in dead silence, followed by the protagonist’s disappointment that he is not human. He declares, emphatically “Touch/ Sweet touch/ You’ve given me too much to feel/ Sweet touch/ You’ve almost convinced me I’m real/ I need something more/ I need something more.” (7:44-8:19).[13]
Conclusion
The vocoder and other tools of artificial vocality present a complicated and conflicting history. Although some musicologists have credited Germany for developing the device, the vocoder had actually originated in the United States. Furthermore, as is evidenced in the previous posts, its initial date of creation stretches as far back as 1928. Artificial vocality has now become common practice in contemporary popular music, but it also carried a slightly darker purpose as a device for scrambling speech during World War II. Despite the negative social reactions associated with artificial vocality, not every musical artist has perceived the inclusion of vocal electronics as a means of cheating. Likewise, discussions of “grain” and “race” in relation to artificial vocality can create dangerous factual pitfalls because they erroneously suggest aspects of “authenticity” and introduce bias. As demonstrated in these posts, artificial vocality is not exclusive to race or gender. The three performing artists discussed (Stevie Wonder, Imogen Heap and Daft Punk) utilize it for various musical purposes: whether to raise concern over social problems, emphasize aspects of love, or to add it in conjunction with dance beats. In summation, what really matters is the music itself. One should at least take time to appreciate the sounds accentuated by the synthesized voice rather than dismissing it.
Bibliography
Auner, Joseph. “‘Sing it for Me’: Posrhuman Ventriloquism in Recent Popular Music,” Journal of the Royal Music Association, Vol. 128 (1), 2003: 98-122. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3557466 (accessed March 29, 2014).
Bhagwhati, Sandeep. “Imagining the Other’s Voice: On Composing Across Vocal Traditions.” In Vocal Music and Contemporary Identities: Unlimited Voices in East Asia and the West, edited by Chistian Utz and Frederick Lau. London and New York: Routledge, 2013), 76-98.
Bossis, Bruno. “Reflections on the analysis of artificial vocality: representations, tools and prospective.” Organised Sound, Vol. 9 (1) (April 2004), 91-98. http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1355771804000123 (accessed March 29, 2014).
Barthes, Roland. “The Grain of the Voice.” In Image, Music, Text, Trans. Stephen Heath (New York: Hill and Wang,1977)
Fischman, Rajmil. “The phase vocoder: theory and practice.” Organised Sound , Vol. 2 (2), August 1997. http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1355771897009060. (accessed March 15, 2014).
Gill, Chris. “Robopop: Part Man, Part Machine, All Daft Punk” Remix (May, 2001): 167-175.
Hawkins, Stan and John Richardson. “Remodeling Britney Spears: Matters of Intoxication and Motivation.” Popular Music and Society, Vol. 5 (3), 2007: 605-629.
Jarman-Ivens, Freya. “Chapter 3: Karen Carpenter: America’s Most Defiant Square,” in Queer Voices: Technologies, Vocalities, and the Musical Flaw. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. 59-93.
Kristeva, Julia. “Revolution in Poetic Language.” In The Kristeva Reader, Ed. In Moi (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), 120-123.
Lundy, Zeth 33 1/3: Songs in the Key of Life. New York: Continuum, 2007.
Ribowsky, Mark. Signed, Sealed, and Delivered: The Soulful Journey of Stevie Wonder. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2010.
Roads, Curtis, Steven Travis Pope, Aldo Piccialli, and Giovanni De Poli. Music Signal Processing. Lisse, Netherlands, Exton, PA: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers, 1997.
Sillitoe, Sue and Matt Bell. “Recording Cher.” Sound on Sound (February 1999). http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb99/articles/tracks661.htm (accessed April 12, 2014).
Tompkins, Dave. How to Wreck a Nice Beach: The Vocoder from World War II to Hip-Hop: The Machine Speaks. Chicago: StopSmiling Books, 2010.
Woloshyn, Alexa. “Imogen Heap As Musical Cyborg: Renegotiations of Power, Gender, and Sound.” Journal on the Art of Record Production, Issue 4 (October 2009), 1-10
Worby, Robert. “Chapter Six: Cacophony,” in Music, Electonic Media and Culture, Ed.Simon Emmerson (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2000). 139.
Discography
Daft Punk. Homework. Parlophone Records Ltd., 1997. CD.
__. Discovery. Parlophone Records Ltd., 2001. CD
__. Random Access Memories. Columbia Records, 2013. CD
Heap, Imogen, I Megaphone. Almo Sounds Ltd., 1998. CD
__. Speak for Yourself. Megaphonic Records, 2005. CD.
Various Artists. Sesame Street: Songs from the Street, Vol. 2, Sesame Workshop, 2010. CD.
Wonder, Stevie. Innervissions. UMG Recording, Inc., 1973. CD.
__. Music of My Mind., 2000. CD
__. Number 1s, Mowtown Records, 2007. CD
__. Songs in the Key of Life. UMG Recordings, Inc., 1976, 2000. CD.
Webography
"GRAMMY History: 19th Annual GRAMMY Awards," http://www.grammy.com/awards/19th-annual-grammy-awards (accessed April 30, 2014).
“56th Annual GRAMMY Awards Winners and Nominees,” http://www.grammy.com/nominees (accessed April 30, 2014).
Hermes, Will. “Review of Random Access Memories by Daft Punk.” http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/random-access-memories-20130513 (accessed April 30, 2014).
Footnotes
[1] Gill, Chris. “Robopop: Part Man, Part Machine, All Daft Punk” Remix (May, 2001): 167-175
[2] Daft Punk, Homework, Parlophone Records Ltd., 1997. CD.
[3] Chris Gill, “Robopop: Part Man, Part Machine, All Daft Punk,” Remix (May, 2001): 168.
[4] Ibid.
[5]Daft Punk, Discovery, Parlophone Records Ltd., 2001. CD, Tr. 1.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid., Tr. 4.
[8] Will Hermes, “Review of Random Access Memories by Daft Punk,” http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/random-access-memories-20130513 (accessed April 30, 2014).
[9] “56th Annual GRAMMY Awards Winners and Nominees,” http://www.grammy.com/nominees (accessed April 30, 2014).
[10] Daft Punk, Random Access Memories. Columbia Records, 2013. CD. Tr. 2
[11] Ibid., Tr. 4.
[12] Ibid., Tr. 7.
[13] Ibid.