Talk:Kraftwerk

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article falls within the scope of the WikiProject contemporary music, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of contemporary music subjects. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Germany Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project and help with our open tasks.

This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Additional information:

	This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: criterion met

Electronic music Portal

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Electronic music, set up to organize and expand entries on Electronic music.

This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.

Top

This article has been rated as top-importance on the importance scale.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

[edit] live photos

currently the article has 4 live photos from 2004 ... any chance of having one from pre-Autobahn, one from the classic line-up, and one from the modern incarnation, as per the live section of the article?--feline1 16:49, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Stage shows

I'm not very happy with today's new "stage shows" additions - far too much POV stuff (eg Robots being the "highlight" of a show?! It's not an enclyclopedia's job to tell people what their favourite bit of the show was - personally I far prefer to watch the human band members on stage. Also there is far too much waffle and speculation about who plays what. Firstly, there is nothing whatsoever remarkable in the modern day and age about pop bands playing to backing tracks or sequences! Why remark on Kraftwerk's use of it? Secondly, having been to Kraftwerk shows recently, it was fairly easy to spot who was playing what, by watching their hands on the controllers and hearing what was coming out of the speaker. I don't see what the mystery is. They've also explained in interviews how they sequence things live (choosing different sequences on the fly) - perfectly commonplace and ordinary with today's equipment. ..... in short, this should be an encyclopedia article with an objective, comparative view of what Kraftwerk do, not parroting fan-babble discourse.--feline1 12:31, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Well I finally got off my ass and re-wrote the live section. Help with tidying appreciated!--feline1 17:10, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

where would one find this updated live section that feline wrote?

it forms the "live shows" section of the Kraftwerk page! --feline1 23:27, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Concise informative page of great value. Thanks to all who contributed to it. I heard these guys perform late last century at the UEA and was amazed that they got an audience from 15 to 55 dancing ! --The Norwikian

[edit] 'unnice' reference to Krautrock

Although Kraftwerk are a very important part of the German Music scene, I do not like the idea of them being a part of Krautrock. Very often Krautrock is associated with 'stupid', 'imitation' or 'unemotional'. And Kraftwerk were innovators. Maybe we should change that reference. --mac_c 15:18, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, I've never seen Krautrock described as stupid or imitative - if it has been, that's just the opinion of those so-describing it, and shouldn't be taken as The Absolute Truth Of The Matter. In any case, I do believe that Kraftwerk's stuff at least prior to Autobahn is frequently associated with Krautrock (they were produced by Conny Plank, after all). The "See also: Krautrock" which is in the article right now is the bare minimum mention we could have of Krautrock; there should be more, eventually. --Camembert

Full ACK! I have not seen it like that before. Thank you! --mac_c 15:57, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Discography format

I contest formal parts of the recent edits (diff here) to the discography by User:Snow1215. I prefer to warn and talk about it first instead of starting a revert war:

I had put the English titles first, with mention of the original German titles; this was reverted. This is an English article, the articles titles/URLs are in English: the discog should list English titles first. (Isn't there already an official policy on that?)

All added singles have been predefined as wikilinks to non-existing pages, which seems crazy to me. Wikipedia isn't an exhaustive database for every single in existence, and most or all of them don't need/deserve their own page, yet the red links just invite anyone to do just that.

I had reformated all entries with the (year) in front of titles; this was reverted. But the years first is a clearer format (all years in a column), as well as allowing to better see a band's activity at a glance.

The change from album title Kraftwerk to Kraftwerk 1 is apocryphal and revisionist.

The change from "Tone Float - by then Organisation (band)" to simply "Tone Float - Organisation" is uninformative because only fans will understand it's not a double name or an alternative album name.

I intend to fix/revert the above points, which I currently see as problems or lesser versions. Comments or suggestions?

Also, on another level, I object to the edit's deceptive summary "added images and singles", when it was more like "added images and singles, reworked discog format (German title first, years last)".

←^#6_{talk 21:06, 14 May 2005 (UTC)}

I have no problem with reverting back to the old way. My apologies. Note: I will Wikify the song "Autobahn" as I do think it is worthy of its own page, since it is such a landmark song in music history (i.e. It is #16 on Q Magazine's "100 Songs That Changed The World") Snow1215 12:04, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Kraftwerk comparable to Beatles?

YES THEY ARE COMPARABLE TO THE BEATLES, THE KRAFTWERK INFLUENCE IN ELECTRONIC MUSIC IS ENORMOUS, IMPRESSIVE, YOU CAN TALK TO ANY GENRE BASED ELECTRONIC SUBJECT, BAND OR ORGANIZATION, FROM HOUSE TO TRANCE, FROM PSYCHO TO DRUM AND BASS, FROM POP TO INDUSTRIAL, KRAFTWERK IS WIDELY RESPECTED BY THE ELECTRONIC SCENE, THE BEATLES WERE A GROUP THAT DEFINED POPULAR MUSIC, AND THATS WHAT THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO, SELL, SELL A LOT, THEY ARE THE BAND THAT SYMBOLISE THE WORD "MAINSTREAM" THEY GOT INTO EVERBODYS HOME, AND THEY WERE HEARD BY ALMOST EVERY PERSON IN THE WORLD, THATS WHY THEY ARE THE GREATEST POP GROUP EVER, KRAFTWERK WAS NOT DESIGNED FOR THAT, THEY ARE THE PIONEERS OF ELECTRONIC MUSIC, THE CREATORS, THEY MADE A REVOLUTION IN THE WAY OF MAKING MUSIC, THEY CONTRIBUTED HUGELY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ELECTRONIC MUSICAL EQUIPMENT, THEY DEVELOPED THE USE OF PERFECT TIME SEQUENCING IN MUSICAL FORMS, THEY ARE THE PERFECCIONISM IN THE EXPRESSION OF MUSIC, THEY ARE PURE ART, AND THEIR INFLUENCE IS ENORMOUS, MANY OF THE ELECTRONIC MUSICIANS TODAY HAVENT HEARD ABOUT KRAFTWERK BUT THEY OWE THEM EVERYTHING, HUTTERS AND SCHNEIDERS GENIUS IS EQUAL OR GREATER THAN MC CARTNEYS OR LENNONS, I LOVE THE BEATLES THEY ARE GREAT, I REALLY REALLY REALLY LOVE THEM, BUT ITS REAL AND COHERENT TO PUT KRAFTWERK AND THEM IN THE SAME PLANE, WE MUSICIANS OWE THEM A LOT.

In what imaginable way? The line in the intro compares to them to the Beatles in terms of influence in the second half of the 20th century. In simple terms, they clearly had no appreciable influence over music before they were founded.

Beyond this confusion, I don't see how Kraftwerk influencing electronic music's extension into more of the mainstream is anywhere close to the influence the Beatles had. There are several bands listed that note Kraftwerk's influence on them - most of which are in the broad electronic/techno category. The Beatles influenced a much wider variety of musicians - and ones which are much better known. Sampling of Beatles songs and covering is also significantly greater than for Kraftwerk. None of this is designed to detract from the real influence and talent of Kraftwerk. Rkevins82 23:28, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

I disagree - in terms of their influence on musical/sonic/timbral form, I find Kraftwerk's influence much greater than that of The Beatles - the Beatles fundamentally always used the traditional 'beat group' line up of vocals/guitar/bass/drums/piano. They experimented in the studio in their later years, dubbing on the odd cello or sitar, but since string sections and Indian music already existed, this was more cultural appropriation than anything new... Between 'Autobahn' and 'Computerwelt' Kraftwerk devised an entirely new musical sound and form, which never existed before, and is now ubiquitous.--feline1 01:50, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

LOL. How anyone can say that Kraftwerk are not influential is completely beyond me!

That's not at all what I said. Read my post and see that I was simply commenting that I did not believe them to be as influential as the Beatles. Rkevins82 07:17, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

And I, for one, think Rkevins82 is right on. The Beatles influence was far broader in all aspects of culture. In any event, the statement is an opnion, not a fact, and since it's not coming from a notable music or pop-culture expert, it's original research. I've revised the article accordingly. Skyraider 16:44, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

It's arguable just how much influece each band had, but it's pretty solid that KW had a lot of influence in a lot of unexpected places. Hiphop owes a debt to Kraftwerk, certainly, and not just because "Planet Rock" sampled the heck out of TEE. That fact may be of some relevance. --Nulldevice 15:07, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

"After all, Kraftwerk are one of the few bands in history who genuinely bear comparison to the Beatles. Not because of their sound or their image, but because, like the Beatles, it is impossible to overstate their influence on modern music." - The Guardian [1]

"‘The Beatles and Kraftwerk’ may not have the ring of ‘The Beatles and the Stones’, but, nonetheless, these are the two most important bands in music history." - NME [2]

I reverted your edits, you've got your evidence right here. ;) --Andylkl ^(talk) 16:49, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

You've documented that the opinion has been expressed in notable publications. That does not change the opinion into a fact. If you want to quote those citations in the article, that's fine, but the article itself should not be endorsing an opinion.Skyraider 01:50, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I've added back the mention with reference (and reworded it a bit so that it's stating that the opinion came from The Guardian and NME). That should be fine now. --Andylkl ^(talk) 08:38, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

Skyraider, to be blunt, I think you're talking rubbish! ;-) It *is* a widely documented FACT that countless musicians have testified to the influence Kraftwerk had on them. It's nothing to do with the "opinions" of stupid music journalists. --feline1 13:51, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

You're entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine. If you paid any attention to my edits you would have seen that I never disputed that Kraftwerk was influential (my edits preserved that fact). But "influence" in and of itself is not objectively quantifiable. As such, any statement that "A's influence is comparable to B's" is an opinion. I'ts perfectly okay to include the FACT that a particular opinion has been expressed by one or more notable sources. (Andylkl's edit is fine, IMO) It is NOT okay for a Wikipedia article to embrace an opinion. (See Wikipedia:NPOV ) Skyraider 16:44, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

you're trying to tell me that all those thousands of musicians who testify that Kraftwerk were a big influence on them aren't actually sure about it? that they might be mistaken? that it's not a fact that they were influenced by them, but merely their own opinion that they were influenced by them?! I find your reasoning rather ahine. Anyways - I think it is a nice context setter for the start of the article - if someone who knew very little about pop music happened to read about Kraftwerk, it would be a useful piece of info for them, that, within popular culture, Kraftwerk and The Beatles are generally regarded by just about everyone as having been immensely influential. For anyone more familiar with pop music, it's just a truism anyways.--feline1 21:00, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I like the statement as it stands now. By adding the phrase "considered by some" (which they are, as is Reffed), wikipedia remains NPOV. Is this deigned ok by everyone? Jdcooper 15:33, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

A-OK here. :) --Andylkl ^(talk) 15:52, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

It's rather likely that Kraftwerk's early use of synth and sequencing technology and their production techniques were influential in a way that could be compared to the Beatles' lyrical and melodic contributions to western pop music. For example, just as Lonnie Donegan and Buddy Holly inflenced the Beatles, Kraftwerk influenced thousands of bands and radio programmers. Sales and celebrity are not the only benchmarks of cultural influence. Anyway the notion isn't as farfetched as it seems. Also, the trajectory of pop music in Europe has at times been different than in North America. Editors may want to avoid being too protective of the cultural dominance of icons like the Beatles and Elvis Presley. Both had enormous impact and made music beloved of millions, but they weren't functioning in a cultural void, etc and their live/visual presentations and charisma as performers had something to do with it too. Wyss 14:03, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

The statmetns to this effect in the opening hae been pared down some, I partially reverted them and added 3 more refrences (I found three more that I did not add though one of them is not usable since its in romanian and on a buliten board). From the looks of it there are any number more to be found with little effort. Infact it seems to me that it might be an intresting expirement to see if there has been an article written about them in the mainstream press or music press in the last 10 years that does not make the "as influential as the beatles" claim. Dalf | Talk 06:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem is more that it's a rather vague, handwaving statement - what does it really mean in terms of tangible effects? We're in the realm of general aesthetic ideas, inspirations, respect for them as artists... Best not to make too much of a meal of it, really, I feel. The current couple of lines are fine. --feline1 09:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Read some of the articles I added (I have about 10 more I did not add Google is cool), most of them are not vague at all. The reason so many people object to this is they misread (and sometime people misstate the claim) to say "same cultural, popular influence" which is absolutely silly. The claim is specifically impact on the musical form something which not only objective. Most of the linked articles enumerate the musical genera which find their origins influenced in part of in majority from Kraftwerk. This can be supported with historical examples from the origins of the genera and as bands listing them as influential. The truth is that in terms of modern music within the last 10 years Kraftwerk probably have a recognizable impact which is considerably higher than the Beatles simply because of the popularity of electronic music in recent times, as well as the number of years diluting the Beatles impact. The Beatles impact on modern music is significant but a major part of it is by proxy. It is some what like saying "the music of the 60's and 70's influence modern music". Additionally the Beatles influence was primarily on Rock music which has been most of the mainstream until recently so the fact that Kraftwerk's music actually lead to a number of new musical forms was not as significant until the resulting new genera of music became more mainstream. Now of course all of this is just my opinion and would constitute original research if I put it in the article without linking the hell out of it. However, the claim in the article is that music critics and the mainstream press frequently make the claim, the article does not attempt to justify the claim as I have just done, as such the 5 references to press/music critics making and in some cases defending or explaining the claim should be more than enough to meet wikipedias verifiability standards. If not like I said I have about 10 more I could add but I got sick of sorting out the {{cite *}} templates, and did not want to have a long link of references at the end of the first paragraph. Dalf | Talk 01:00, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Also note that I reverted it to your version, I did not revert your edit (here I was reverting the eidt after yours further equivicating on the topic (changed often to sometimes). though I admit that was and still am slightly thinking about reverting back to the older version since it is "widely acknowledged" and can be documented as such. Dalf | Talk 01:10, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I don't really disagree! If you read my comments on this subject above (from 2005) they basically say the same thing.--feline1 09:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kraftwerk is/Kraftwerk are?

Following on from edits made on July 5th and 6th, is there a policy as to how articles should refer to bands in general terms? In US English I think one would say "Kraftwerk is a German avant-garde musical group which has made significant contributions" while in UK English it would be "Kraftwerk are a German avant-garde musical group who have made significant contributions" - with the first example referring to the group as a distinct and impersonal item and the second as the people making up the group.

Are Americans really that bone-headed in their use of language?!? /shudders/ In proper English, band names are plural nouns. Any Americans who disagree, I shall poke them with a big pair of SCISSOR and then we'll see who's wearing the TROUSER. :-)--feline1 14:14, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Yet another uppity Brit commenting on American English. Don't get your PANTY up in a bunch about it. UK english is just as rife with ridiculous spellings and nonsensical grammar rules as US English. A pair of scissor?? Using 'pair' with a singular noun is just stupid. In terms of bands, the best way to deal with this situation would be to use "is" if the band name is singualar and "are" if it is plural. Anonymous. 10:30, 14 August, 2005 (UTC)

No, you eejit, we don't say "a pair of scissor" in the British Isles - it was employing some hilarious parody. And it's not pants, it's KNICKERS :0) --feline1 12:00, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Just don't say that word with a stuffy nose when you're in Harlem :( --I am not good at running 20:54, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Harlem? sorry, I don't travel to Holland much ;-) --feline1 12:15, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Like Queen, Black and Elbow? --194.131.108.2 08:17, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes. Queen are doing a reunion tour. Elbow are releasing their new album etc. Propose that for American groups, the article obeys American grammar rules, British/European bands the article obeys British grammar rules. Thoughts? (jdcooper forgot to sign edit)

Sounds reasonable. If the group is American, the article should be US English. If British, the article should be in British English. It makes perfect sense. --Der Sporkmeister 13:54, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Yeah but Kraftwerk are German, so this doesn't help us much LOL --feline1 14:19, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I think articles on European bands should obey British rules, Americans can have Japanese and South American... Jdcooper 23:27, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Was going to make a snarky comment about americans perhaps not getting the better end of that but, I suppose I am not that bothered about is/are distinctions and it looks like this wikipedia does not caire either as long as we are consistent. Dalf | Talk 08:56, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Are the Kraftwerk fascist eurocentric?

"So you see another group, like Tangerine Dream, although they are German they have an English name, so they create onstage an Anglo–American identity, which we completely deny. We want the whole world to know that we are from Germany, because the German mentality—which is more advanced—will always be part of our behavior. We create out of the German language, the mother language, which is very mechanical; we use it as the basic structure of our music." (Hütter)

Are the Kraftwerk fascist eurocentric?Brian W 03:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC))

No. They like German. Twinxor t 06:55, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Quite. "Fascist" means hating things different to yourself. This is not the same as liking/reclaiming your own culture.--feline1 09:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The Man Machine was the first record album I've ever bought, in 1978-9. I wish I would have never done it. I wish I had bought a Tangerine Dream album. English is a Germanic language, so I can't see what's wrong with them. Being a half German, I'm very proud of my backgroung, but, luckily, I have no hatred against Anglo-American culture. Some of the greatest influences on modern music (all genres) come from Manfred Eicher's ECM, and (former) Peter Baumann's Private Music. But fanatic fans of Aphex Twin (if not himself or some of his friends) are invading the web trying to rewrite history, by inflating the importance of the so called Intelligent dance music and its roots,such as the Kratwerk and Klaus Schulze. Brian W

Hütter never said he "hated" Anglo-American culture. Also that quote comes from a famous interview that Lester Bangs did with them in Creem magazine on the 1975 US Autobahn tour. You can be your boots he, ahem, recontextualized the words slightly, to make it all "oooh! nazis!" and controversial. As you may well be aware, post world war II, German culture was in tatters from the Nazis and was getting replaced with bland americanisms - krautrock bands were naturally keen to redevelop a non-fascist German identity.--feline1 10:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

But fanatic fans of Aphex Twin (if not himself or some of his friends) are invading the web trying to rewrite history
I got a chuckle out of that due to redundancy and content. I IZ IN UR INTERTUBEZ REWRITIN HISTOREEZ!

I've never heard this stupid word -Krautrock- before 2004. In 1978-81, before the New Wave boom, in Europe we used the term "electronic rock" to refer to Kraftwerk, Neu, La Dusseldorf, Tubeway Army, Ultravox, Brian Eno's non -Ambient albums, Peter Gabriel's 2nd, 3rd and 4th albums, and even some ZZTop's albums in 82-84, Neil Young's work Trans of that era and the now forgotten french band the Rockets

I forgot to tell that the term "Electronica" is the nth stupid faked-diplomatic attempt to describe "electronic rock and pop" with a spanish sounding word. Brian W 10:50, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

With all due respect, you are beginning to descend into barely intelligable pigeon English. Which tends to make native speakers suspect that your concerns arise more out of your lack of understanding of what you are reading, rather than any actual real problem! --feline1 11:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

You are ridicolous. Native speakers of English can understand me. Why you don't simply admit that I'm right? Brian W 11:31, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Sir, you sound to me like you are drunk whilst sitting in front of a computer. I suggest you log off and go sober up.--feline1 11:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

You're likely right. The user in question called me a Nazi, accused me of being Italian (how is that an insult? Really...), is attempting to combine all EDM related articles under a term that has no common usage ("Club music"), and then proceeds to tell people to learn English when they, as native speakers, can't understand his incoherent rants. He also has a funny idea of concensus, and some strange victimisation complex that makes him think that anything thats not championing his views is Eurocentric, or as he changed to overnight, UK centric.

Thinking you're right when everyone else disagrees with you also suggests a terrible, terrible problem with comprehension. --Kiand 16:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Julian Cope wrote Krautrocksampler in the 90's, and NME had used the term "Deutsch rock" as far back as 1972. Krautrock is certainly not a new term, although admittedly bit silly. Also, I might be beating the horse by now, but I really don't see what you're upset about. Much of German culture in the 60's and 70's was an attempt to recreate a German identity after the Nazis. Look at the New German Cinema, for example. I see

Hütter's comments as being squarely within that ideal. Perhaps a bit bombastic, but hardly fascist. Deleuze 07:23, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, of course, you are free to continue pretending, after all, who cares of youngsters' music genres? Bye.Brian W 18:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The music industry, who rely on them to stay in business. Who cares of your made up ones? You, and thats it. Additionally, you have no idea of what age I am nor any reason to call me a "youngster" --Kiand 19:20, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Everyone, please be reminded that the talk page is for discussion about the article itself, don't stray into personal attacks. Btw Brian, what point are you trying to prove here? --Andylkl ^{[ talk! | c ]} 19:58, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

A good question what is the point here? I will try a summary:

Hmmm, they are Germans and wearing ties - so, they must be fascists! Furthermore they are singing in different languages - so, they are obviously eurocentristic..oh...Japanese isn’t an European language...who cares! Now, here comes the interesting news: The user doesn’t like Kraftwerk but Richard David James ( alias “Aphex Twin” ) hangs around in Wikipedia and tries to re-write music history in favour of his pet band Kraftwerk! He writes that Kraftwerk had some real influence on electronic music. What a weirdo!

This is strange stuff indeed --Sushi Leone 15:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Speak and spell

I corrected this page a little while ago, The Speak and Spell was not used for the artificial speech in Computerwelt, it was a TI Language Translator. I can quote a source. The entry has now reverted to saying Speak and Spell again! Would anyone object too much if I corrected the page again?

no-one will object if you quote your source! If you don't quote it, don't be surprised if you get reverted again - wikipedia has to be verifiable, you see.--feline1 15:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

A sample of the Speak & Spell is used at the start of Heimcomputer/Home Computer, I believe — that distinctive/annoying bleepy melody that was some kind of audio cue device for the intended kiddie user. --Ricadus 17:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that! I've included a couple of hyperlinks to external pages that mention this. --Shalroth

[edit] No mention of the influence on hip-hop?

Seems to me as a fan of hip-hop, their beats have been sampled admittedly (by memory) by huge hip-hop legends such as Afrika Bambaattaa (Trans-Europe Express and Planet Rock), and piece sampled by Dr. Dre. This is mentioned on Afrika Bambaattaa's page, but not mentioned as far as I can tell here. I don't contribute much to Wikipedia, but coming across this page, I found it kind of odd while listening to "Hall of Mirrors" and being amazed how much it sounds like one of Dr. Dre's samples.

I think it would be a nice tribute somewhere to mention some of the groups they specifically influence, if, of course, you can find sources from the artists themselves, or maybe some credits in hip-hop albums that point to this information. Good luck.

ERic 10:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Eric

I don't know which of Dr Dre's sample you're referring to. However, both Kraftwerk and Dr Dre use (often) rather simplistic rhythms and melodies, so it could very well be a coincident. "Hall of Mirrors" speed-up certainly sounds like a hip-hop beat nowadays but. in my opinion, that's simply because both use a fairly simple and repetitive structure. The "bleepy" sound resembles computer sounds from games of the 8-bit and 16-bit era albeit "Hall of Mirrors" predates these by a few years. Nonetheless, that's simply how early chip-music and sound-effects sounded. Music on a Gameboy still sounds this way. This was rather considered a disadvantage (before it became its own genre/style at least) and I doubt several home computers and videoconsoles were designed to have Kraftwerk-like sound. Also while Kraftwerk is certainly popular world-wide and has set milestones, most younger people have probably listened to more videogame sounds and music than Kraftwerk. Thus, whether modern music refers to Kraftwerk or rather chip-music or whether it rips of either, can't really be decided just by listening to it unless it's blatant obvious. --217.87.74.166 01:42, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Would someone please listen to Jay-Z's song "Sunshine" and tell me that beat is not Kraftwerk's Trans-Europa Express ? - Andrew —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.2.138.30 (talk) 08:27, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's not. It's from Kraftwerk's "Man Machine". See the article (Always_Be_My)_Sunshine. This is also a blatant obvious case. --217.87.86.35 (talk) 02:36, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe Rip it Up And Start Again, the book on Post-Punk by Simon Reynalds discusses their importance in Hip-Hop. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.1.197.237 (talk) 02:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Mix is not a remix album!

It features digitally re-recorded versions of a selection of songs which had originally appeared on their earlier albums. I would remove the tag myself if I had access to the page.

I agree. It is nothing like any other ablum. CoolGuy 05:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyedit

This article, or a portion of it, was copyedited by the League of Copyeditors in April 2007. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Copyeditor(s): MuzikJunky 07:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Kraftwerklogo111.png

Image:Kraftwerklogo111.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 05:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remove Exceller 8

I blanked out the page for "Exceller 8" after I realized that there are numerous compilations that have been released by Philips, Vertigo and Fontana that have no bearing on the rest of the official discography.

If we're going to keep Exceller 8, then we might as well add the following compilations too:

Highrail
Autobahn (French comp)
Doppelalbum
Elektro Kinetik
Robots (Cassette comp)
Pop Lions
The Model (Cleopatra comp)
Concert Classics

As you can see, this would be a waste of space and time. There is nothing special about Exceller 8, and it is not a real album, per se. I request the have the entry taken out completely.

So following that logic, why add all the names of relatively minor associates to the navigation template, in a confusing non-alphabetical order, including many who have no wiki-article? It seems just pedantic completism to me; most of the pre-1974 ones only assisted with live performances and contributed little or nothing to the band's legacy.Ricadus 23:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

As far as the other musicians go, they were still part of "the group" whether they performed on record or not. Why should we deny this? I did realize that it was confusing and off topic to put the "Kling Klang Associates" info there. So that can stay out. I didn't think that the members' names had to be in alpha order; I tried to list them chronologically as closely as possible. Also, why do you have to have an article in order to add a name to the navigation template? That shouldn't matter; I've seen plenty of other articles that have this same format. Electrokinesis 07:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Also, I vote to put "The Mix" back into the albums list. Since the songs are re-recorded, can it really count as a compilation? A compilation is a group of recorded tracks from various artists or from various periods of time, as in a greatest hits/best of release. Electrokinesis 20:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Brain to MIDI" removed

"Brian to MIDI" is a live bootleg; therefore, I removed it from the list of compilations.

If any of you feel that it should stay in, then we should add a Bootleg section to the article.Electrokinesis 18:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] This page is a mess

Really. I just cleaned up the tour section a bit, made it a bit more readable and correct some info. I also readded the singles to the discography. Yes it's impossible to list every release in every country but since this is an english encyclopedia it would be good to focus on the US and UK releases.

I removed the videography because Kraftwerk doesn't have one. Yes they made promotional vidoes but they were never released commercially. Linking to youtube clips of these videos is an infringment of copyright.

A few problems still exist. One is that someone started a chronology of Kraftwerk singles but never finished. Unless someone has the time to write an article for every single then I suggest we delete it. Of course we should still leave Wiki articles for the non album singles and important songs such as The Model.

If anyone has any other suggestions then feel free to add the here.

Robert P (can't be bothered creating an account)

21:52, 14 Nov 2007

I think rather than have a number of stubs, the text for them could be grouped into one long article "Kraftwerk singles". The contents panel that gets automatically generated by 'alpha' subheadings would be ideal for accessing the desired song. If entries are ordered simply by song title then it would also allow for different versions (languages, edits, remixes) to be mentioned in the same subsection. Suplementray data (release date[s], chart position, etc) could be in smalltype below the song title alpha head and before the start of the chinwag regarding the song. Ricadus 11:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Erroneous Additions

It is personal opinion that "The Mix" was quote: "...brought up to the production standards of Electric Cafe."

Also, "Expo Remix" is not an album.

I will be erasing this section.68.4.219.17 (talk) 10:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Other edits

I also erased this sentence in regards to TdF Soundtracks:

"Remixes from this album were released in 2007."

The first Aero Dynamik remix single was released in 2004, and the article already makes mention of the 2007 Hot Chip remixes. 68.4.219.17 (talk) 10:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Article Clean-up

I made some corrections to the punctuation in the article, along with editing and adding some new quotes, and updating the tour sections. I wanted to show more of an authentic article; I felt that the added information would also provide a clearer picture what the group is, so that those who are new to Kraftwerk will have a glimpse into how awesome this group is! Good timing, since the 2008 Coachella gig is coming soon.Electrokinesis (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 23:46, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Grammy Note

What is wrong about noting that Kraftwerk is a Grammy award nominated group?Electrokinesis (talk) 05:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, it´s not an important information - especially since Kraftwerk do not appreciate awards and don`t show up at those events ( except when they are performing there..) --88.70.46.71 (talk) 22:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] illusion of classic quartet??

"they were employed to create the illusion of Kraftwerk as classic quartet" - they may have been hired (and apparently rather annoyed when they discovered how much more Ralf and Florian were making) but 'illusion' implies they did nothing other than stand there for photos/concerts (a bit like the current 'other two'). Karl has co-authorship credits on many of the songs, and Wolfgang also clearly had more than an 'illusionary' influence.

Is Ronnie Wood an illusionary Rolling Stone? He is - as I understand it - also on a wage rather than a partner. Lovingboth (talk) 14:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Florian not on 2008 tour--how to cite

I'm not sure how to cite the fact that Florian Schneider is not on the 2008 US tour, or at the very least failed to appear on its first date. I have submitted the fact to the usual news sources (Pitchfork), but it has yet to appear in a citable source. As for how I know, I was standing 8 feet from the stage, and in Florian's place was a guy in his late twenties. I've been a fan for twenty-five years, and can certainly tell Florian from a man half his age.

UPDATE: FOUND IT. IGNORE.

See also ebooksgratis.com: no banners, no cookies, totally FREE.