Interviews & Articles

These often get lost in various different posts so I thought we could start collating them here.

This new one from P4K is a pretty standard, albeit interesting, read. Some good stuff about how they've used old kit from the EPD days.
http://pitchfork.com/features/interviews/9680-running-on-instinct-how-the-chemical-brothers-stay-vital/

I particularly like this quote: "There was only one thing that came out of me; I was trying to copy a Public Enemy record, but I wasn't up to it, so it came out like it did." - It's exactly how I feel about every track I make (if you replace Public Enemy with The Chems, Underworld, Fluke, BT etc.)

Great idea!

One of the most recent ones (2015)
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/jun/28/chemical-brothers-been-together-longer-than-marriages

And one that was recently republished online from 1995
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/jun/17/chemical-brothers-classic-interview-1995-muzik-rocks-backpages

1999 Surrender era, where Tom calls Liam Howlett a genius
http://www.nyrock.com/interviews/chemical_int.htm
 
2010, Further era
http://www.clashmusic.com/feature/sound-and-vision-the-chemical-brothers

Some fans assumed that ‘Further’ was an EP, as there are only eight tracks…

Ed: Yeah. Someone was saying, ‘Surely they’ve got an hour and ten minutes of music’. Of course we have. We’ve got hours and hours we could give to the world,

Ed, I demand those hours and hours! Like.. now!

Brotherhood (2008), one that i really like: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3559048/Chemical-Brothers-talking-about-new-album-Brotherhood.html

Brotherhood (2008), one that i really like: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/3559048/Chemical-Brothers-talking-about-new-album-Brotherhood.html

This is great. Thanks, Explud!

If anyone finds any detailed stuff about their (more recent) live show and how it works, I would very much appreciate a read of that. I'm trying to redesign my live show at the moment and could do with some more specific inspiration than "I wanna jam through my tunes like The Chems do!".

This is great. Thanks, Explud!

If anyone finds any detailed stuff about their (more recent) live show and how it works, I would very much appreciate a read of that. I'm trying to redesign my live show at the moment and could do with some more specific inspiration than "I wanna jam through my tunes like The Chems do!".

There are some details about it in this article: http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/dec11/articles/chem-bros.htm

I skimmed this before and didn't think much of it but it's actually super detailed. Thanks.

Pitchfork's bewilderingly hilarious review of WATN from 2007 discussing the brothers "descent into ineptitude".  Beware, all sort of puzzling comparisons ahead!
http://pitchfork.com/reviews/albums/10369-we-are-the-night/

Tom's radio interview on triple J, breakfast with Matt & Alex
http://www.abc.net.au/triplej/musicnews/s4222916.htm

I think this interview it's from 2002, Come With Us Era
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/music/0402/chemicalbrothersinterview.htm


Remember kids, uncle Tom says, don't do drugs.
http://www.sfweekly.com/shookdown/2007/09/28/chemical-brothers-tom-interview-drugs-are-bad-mmkay

Review of BITE via NME! Very optimistic now for the release. JacksRevenge posted it on FB earlier today.

http://www.nme.com/reviews/the-chemical-brothers/16161


‘I’ll See You There’ takes them closer than ever to the perennial psychedelic touchstone of The Beatles’ ‘Tomorrow Never Knows’

This section of electro-psych wonder culminates in the fantastic ‘Radiate’

‘Taste of Honey’ is odder still, coming on like the kind of obscure gem you’d uncover on a small-selling seven-inch from 1968

Descriptions are priceless!

‘I’ll See You There’ takes them closer than ever to the perennial psychedelic touchstone of The Beatles’ ‘Tomorrow Never Knows’[/i]

I honestly can't see how they could get closer to Tomorrow Never Knows than they did with Let Forever Be, but I'm completely prepared to be surprised.
They played ISYT at Glastonbury though and it didn't exactly make me think Beatles.

I honestly can't see how they could get closer to Tomorrow Never Knows than they did with Let Forever Be, but I'm completely prepared to be surprised.
They played ISYT at Glastonbury though and it didn't exactly make me think Beatles.

To be honest, I never really shared the common belief that Let Forever Be sounded anything like Tommorrow Never Knows. Maybe they have a similiar vibe going on. But even beat-wise, Setting Sun is much closer to TNK than LFB. When I listen to LFB I never get the association with TKN, likewise with TKN. They're both so distinctively different to me.

As for interviews, Pitchfork has come up with a surprisingly positive review about BITE
Running on instinct: How the Chemical Brothers stay vital

Fittingly, Born in the Echoes contains some of the duo's most effective club cuts in years: "Just Bang", a gnarly house bruiser that sounds like the bastard child of Ron Hardy and the Bomb Squad; "EML Ritual", a seasick acid-house burner featuring the high-strung crooner Ali Love and a battery of rushing 909 snares; and "Reflexion", a pitch-bending instrumental that wails like a five-alarm fire in a synthesizer factory. Rowlands calls the album's tougher cuts "instinct records—they're not trying to be everything to everyone."

These subwoofer-stretchers are just part of the album, though. Elsewhere, St. Vincent plays an ice princess on the shuddering "Under Neon Lights", and Beck drops his guard on the melancholy "Wide Open". There are '60s-inspired psychedelic rave-ups and odd, radiophonic sketches; in my estimation, the spooky and slippery title track, featuring Cate Le Bon, is one of the best things they've ever written.

Nice to see Pitchfork giving them some love. They tend to be obscure music loving and elitist critics in general - but whether it's painful to admit or not, they are tough critics and are respected in that regard.

Nice to see Pitchfork giving them some love. They tend to be obscure music loving and elitist critics in general - but whether it's painful to admit or not, they are tough critics and are respected in that regard.

Well said, Whirls! I read some of their previous album reviews and really felt they were trying too hard to come across as elite and "educated". Sometimes I got the feeling they weren'event familiar with electronic music at all and merely comparing some of the prominent chems tunes with a new album.  Calling them predictable  in their  WATN review, just because they had guest vocalist again, really put me off.

A long review - too long- of BITE by Dave Faulkner of Aussie band Hoodoo Gurus HERE
Looks like the article's photo was taken when they went to

, which  I reckon is near Tom's house.
And whilst we're looking at Ed's Instagram, he took a crap picture of a big

A long review - too long- of BITE by Dave Faulkner of Aussie band Hoodoo Gurus HERE
Looks like the article's photo was taken when they went to

, which  I reckon is near Tom's house.
And whilst we're looking at Ed's Instagram, he took a crap picture of a big

Best review I've read and a lovely take of the album - vividly described and an intriguing look down the chemical rabbit hole. I like that it's not just some play by play one sentence review of each song, then punctuated with numerical score/star rating. The review has some meat on its bones and weaves in history as it draws similarities across previous bodies of work. Reading reviews and stuff like that is my teaser of choice as we're counting down the clock until release day. After Buying the first three tracks and playing EML Ritual (my favorite of the bunch so far) repeatedly on YouTube, I have been staying away from the digital previews and gig footage etc until I have the album in hand. Can wait to see where this journey takes me, and again will say that I can't wait to hear everything in context.

The Telegraph

Best review I've read and a lovely take of the album - vividly described and an intriguing look down the chemical rabbit hole. I like that it's not just some play by play one sentence review of each song, then punctuated with numerical score/star rating. The review has some meat on its bones and weaves in history as it draws similarities across previous bodies of work. Reading reviews and stuff like that is my teaser of choice as we're counting down the clock until release day. After Buying the first three tracks and playing EML Ritual (my favorite of the bunch so far) repeatedly on YouTube, I have been staying away from the digital previews and gig footage etc until I have the album in hand. Can wait to see where this journey takes me, and again will say that I can't wait to hear everything in context.

Yesh, it's a great one. I wasn't bothered by its length at all. The in-depth character of it made it really intriguing to read and gave enough room to explain why th reviewer thought like he thought. Also it didn't have an elite like or hard-trying attitude to come across as somehow really smart.

1) Consequences of Sound review

2) I don't agree with the  comments about Further in this review.  This magazine is normally aimed at um, mature rock audiences or something: Mojo Magazine

Whatever about the pretentious "7.8" score which Pitchfork favours, this feels like a well written review.
(Tells us the source of the line from I'll See You There)
PITCHFORK

Oh they sampled Bill Bissett before on the title track of WATN, and it sounds like that's where they got the WATN title from too.  But maybe everyone else knew that already. See the I'll See You There thread for more.

Talking of wanna-be smart ass, hard-trying reviews:
http://www.treblezine.com/reviews/24215-chemical-brothers-born-in-the-echoes-review/

How much Chems reference can you get in one article?

Also, I read in an German review that the album sounds in parts "directionless" because they say it's a "cocktail of styles". They also claim the chems' new album is devoid of trend setting sounds. Yeah, as if that's what albums are solely meant for... I'll never understand those kind of critics. There's just no pleasing them.