Hard time finding a response I like to 1. d4

So far I've tried (as in: read up on, studied and played in tons of online games as well as a dozen tournament games each) the following:

Dutch (Classical and Stonewall)
King's Indian
Nimzo Indian
Queen's Indian

(The real reason is, they all allowed me to respond to 1. d4 with 1. ... e6, and go "yay!" the one time out of ten the opponent played 2. e4, letting me play my favourite French :P)

None of them lead to positions I like. It's gotten to the point where a part of me just dies inside everytime someone plays 1. d4 against me :P The only time I have any fun at all is if I play the Englund gambit, but that's utter garbage. (On the bright side, at least then I have some fun while it lasts :P)

No idea if it helps to know, but I'm a firm devotee of the French defense against 1. e4, specifically liking the advance variation. What the heck should I play, you reckon? :D

I'm reasonably sure you can play 1.d4 e6 2. c4 d5 and go into a Queen's Gambit Declined....or most of the d4-d5 openings, by transposition.

Try the grunfeld

The King's Indian has a similiar spirit to the French because they both carry the tendancy to lead to closed positions.  Both have an Exchange Variation that is not very popular or dangerous.

Sharp openings:

King's Indian: Exactly the same as the french, just more extreme. White advances on the queenside, black on the kingside, whoever comes first with a breakthrough wins (white just needs a breakthrough, black needs to mate).

Benko Gambit: Sacrificing a pawn for POSITIONAL compensation, let you play active the first 20 moves, often going into a superior endgame, even though you are down a pawn!

Grunfeld: Giving white a big centre, counterattacking, slightly like the french.

Positional defences:

Nimzo-Indian, let you try for the win whatever your opponent play, because of bishop-knight imbalance.

Classical Queens gambit not accepted: Solid, alot of space to outplay weaker opponents, might be slightly passive.

Semi-slav: Sometimes extremely sharp, sometimes slightly dull.

You can't play the french against 1: d4, so learn another pawn structure and be familiar with it. Everyone hates d4 when they don't got their ¨lovely¨ defence, but when you get it, you will be very happy when you see d4. I actually played the french, but got away since I couldn't use much I learned in the french to anything else than the french. Now I play e5, and get much more interesting games. However, my opponents like them too, but that's just fair.

If you like the French, then maybe pick up the Slav and/or Semi-Slav. They share many similar characteristics. 

You can play 1.....e6 and hope for 2.e4

Most of the rest of the time you will get 2.c4 and then you can just play 2..d5.

You will then 95% of the time get 3. Nc3 or 3.Nf3.

So you just need to work out sharpish lines to respond to both of those.

If 3. Nc3 have a look at the Tarrasch (3..c5) specifically the Hennig Von Schara gambit line (4.cxd5...c5xd4!?)

If 4. Nf3 you could try the semi-slav (3...c6).

One fun idea here is that after 4. e3 you can go ...Nf6 (his Bg5 pin is no longer available) with the idea of popping the Nf6 into e4 and then (especially if the white bishop comes out to d3) you can drop into a very favorable Dutch Stonewall set-up (which I assume you know already) with ..f5 and a strong king side attack (and he has no fianchetto to blunt it).

If he doesn't play 4. e3 then the 4..b5 lines are pretty sharp too.

If he exchanges on d5 then take back with the e pawn to preserve some imbalance in the position.

EXACTLY!  I tell lower rated players in my local area that ask me this type of question to do exactly this.  If they claim they play either the French or King's Indian, I tell them to play the other along with it for this exact reason.

Both openings deal heavily with blocked centers (not semi-closed, like the QGD), and both heavily gear towards the general concepts of blocked centers, like Attacking at the base (d6 in the King's Indian) not the head (f4 in the King's Indian) of the pawn chain, and the "Pawn Pointing Theory".  What that is is if the center is completely blocked, you observe which way each side's pawns are pointing amongst the blocked pawns, and that's the side you should be attacking.  So in say, the Advance French, White attacks Kingside, Black Queenside.  In the Classical King's Indian, White Queenside and Black Kingside.

but dont you in the kings indian burn the bridges to go all out for a win while the french is very solid, were you try to play more safe or is it my misunderstanding??

If you play passivly in the french, you just get squeezed out by the white space advantage. You'll have to make pawn weaknesses to create pressure on the white centre and get some piece activity

Solidity isn't the same as passivity. 

And, frankly, this is why as a french player I never really became a fan of the KI. 

The french is largely a strategic rather than tactical option. While there are certainly plenty of tactics involved in playing it well, and some very sharp lines where you better be boned up on theory, for the most part the French is an opening where you can find good moves over the board once you understand the basic ideas.

My experience with the KI is that this is not something it shares in common with the French at all. It is a tactical weapon with not much strategic depth, and if you don't know your book, you're likely to come out of the opening worse. Slight mistakes in the French can be fixed with correct play later one. Slight mistakes in the KI end in a near immediate lost position. 

The other problem I see in the KI is that it is a dark square opening while the french is a light square opening. So ideas from one don't really translate that well to the other. 

That's why I think the slav is actually a better choice for the French player. While the pawn structure is different, and the positional issues are different, it shares at least a few characteristics with the French that makes it a natural partner: it's a light square strategy based opening that is solid and positional in nature and once you understand the concepts in the relatively few variations of the opening, you can pretty much find good moves over the board based on those general concepts. 

I strongly advise the Grunfeld Defense. If you like the French, then you will probably prefer this one. It counterattacks the center with moves like c5 and e5. You also get a monster bishop on g7. Its fun if you are a tactical player like me.

Do you really think French players are looking for a highly tactical opening? 

Many people, including the original poster of this thread, have the misconception that the French is a positional opening.  It's not!  The French is a very aggressive and tactical defense.  The pawn chain leaves the King a tad safer than say, the Sicilian Dragon, but it's actually in the same category as the Sicilian.  A French player that "wants something different" should play the Sicilian and Vice Versa.  Your more positional player should be looking at the Caro-Kann and 1...e5!  Another mis-conception is that players all seem to associate the Ruy Lopez with tactics.  The Ruy, especially the Closed Ruy outside of the Zaitsev, is extremely positional.  If you look at games with the Breyer (9...Nb8) or Chigorin (9...Na5), most of the major games played by GMs are positional struggles.

And by the way, I can assure you that finding moves over the board based on mere concepts, outside of maybe the Exchange and Advance, will never work here.  I'd like to see you use your "General French Concepts" after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e5 c5 5.a3 Bxc3+ 6.bxc3 Ne7 7.Qg4 Qc7 8.Qxg7 Rg8 9.Qxh7 cxd4 10.Ne2 Nc6 11.f4 Bd7 12.Qd3 dxc3 13.Rb1 (or 13.Qxc3 or 13.Nxc3) against anybody that hows how to play the White side of the French Poisoned Pawn.

And by the way, the King's Indian, outside of maybe the Four Pawns Attack, is a very positional defense.

Tactical and Agressive are NOT the same thing.

The center is locked.  Both sides have specific targets.  For White it's to create fatal weaknesses on the Queenside while defending Black's Attack.  Black it's to pry open the White King and Checkmate him, with a very well known positional sacrifice, namely ...Bh3 (or ...Bxh3 if White is Naive enough to play such a dumb move, advancing pawns on the side where he's weak).

There are far more tactics in the Benko, Benoni, and Grunfeld than there are in the King's Indian.

I think the Caro-Kann is very tactical, at least in the topical main line and Panov lines.

I'd say you are half right.  Being a former Caro-Kann player, here's what I can say about the various Main and Panov lines:

Main Line:

4...Bf5 - Very Positional in nature
4...Nf6 - Very Tactical in nature
4...Nd7 - Black is forcing White to find sacrificial tactics.  If successful, White will win, and if not, almost all endings favor Black

Panov:

5...g6 - Tactical (and dubious if you ask me)
5...e6 - Very positional, and can easily result in a direct transposition to the Nimzo-Indian Defense
5...Nc6 - Depends on how White follows up.  6.Bg5 is one of the most tactical lines in all of the Caro-Kann.  Allowing the endgame instead is extremely positional.

Queen's gambit declined. I'm willing to bet that you're bored because you're not sure of what's going on rather than just not liking the positions. Complicated stuff like Benoni or Dutch where you're creating more crap to look out for probably won't help with that. I suggest Lasker's line 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Nf6 4.Bg5 Be7 5.Nf3 Ne4. Or maybe you can try the Tarrasch defence which is 1.d4 d5 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 c5. Here you can play just with your knowledge of isolated d-pawns.

You gotta go Grunfeld! It is also like the French, since you are undermining white's center.

Grunfield!