I was just surfing Amazon looking for CDs. One customer had the 
following comments about Brotherhood from the Chemical Brothers:



Greatest Hits albums are for the kind of people who don't really like 
music. For them, music is that thing that makes a noise out of their 
tinny mobile phone, or sits next to the nappies in MegaHyperGloboMart. 
These are the type of people who would buy a DVD called "The Best Of 
Star Wars" which contains only the battles, with all the dialogue taken 
out, in some kind of 2 hour orgiastic overdose of explosions.

"Brotherhood", the Chemical Brothers second 'best of' album in fifteen 
years, now ensures that shoddy Greatest Hits compilations now account 
for one third of their official albums. Now, the Chemical Brothers are 
perhaps what I can describe as an exercise in hyper-adrenalised, 
mindlessly hedonistic minimalism : a monotonous, vibrating beat that 
changes in some infinitesmal element every 16 beats - much like those 
hyper-extended 12" Dub Remixes that lasted a quarter hour on New Order 
B-sides in the mid Eighties. Live at least, The Chemical Brothers (who I 
managed to see one and a quarter times : the quarter being whilst 
walking through a field to get away from them at the 2000 Apocalyse Now 
: Glastonbury Festival), are the equivalent of watching someone getting 
very enthusiastic about a punishingly loud and garish gigantic statue of 
a house whilst standing on the spot at midnight in a thunderstorm. For 
some people, I'm in no doubt that it is great fun, but for me, it's 
boring. Not only that, but to an extent, the music is of a very specific 
genre : Music Made By And For People Who Used To Be Poor When They Were 
A Bit Better.

Thanks to the impact of their collaborators, The Chemical Brothers have 
produced some very passable electronic pop songs, but largely this is by 
accident than design. When left to their own devices, they can and do 
produce glacial and pounding epics of instrumental cacophony that also 
manages to avoid anything resemble a sustained melody line. The songs 
are all assemblages of beats and instrumental riffs created like a 
skyscraper - one floor at a time with no real perception of a narrative 
aside from just to keep going on. They sound great, but like an action 
film, what does it all mean?

Some of the instrumental stuff is brilliant : "Star Guitar" and "Leave 
Home" are entertaining diversions, but some of it is just plain and 
dull. Where the best of their work comes into effect, it's largely where 
the guest contributor - Noel Gallagher, The Flaming Lips, Bernard 
Sumner, Beth Orton - bring a fully assembled song that The Chemical 
Brothers just turn into a vocal remix of the original, with hooj drums 
and mahoosive throbbing bass. This means that whilst the Chemical 
Brothers have a distinctive sound, they are in effect a superior 
production team with slight songwriting ability. The idea of a Greatest 
Hits is a bit of an anthema. It would be akin to having a "Best of Shep 
Pettibone 1983-1988" double vinyl album. Great to listen to, but what's 
the point?

That said, "Hey Boy / Hey Girl" is always going to sound fantastic 
coming out of a PA at 2am. Maybe not so amazing coming out of a mobile 
phone on the 47 bus at 7.14am. Then again, very little is amazing about 
7.14am on any morning.

I obviously missed the point of this Greatest Hits as I already have 
"93-03" which is a fine and more artistically credible release. 
"Brotherhood" whiffs faintly of contractual obligation, with a largely 
minimal lack of effort in the packaging or the utterly random and 
baffling sequencing. About the only part of the "Brotherhood" release 
worth considering is the limited edition which contains a second CD, 
this time featuring the rare (and previously only-on vinyl) Electronic 
Battle Weapon series. The series is made up of prototype versions of 
many songs from across all periods of the band released on largely 
anonymous 12" singles in one-off limited pressings. It's good to finally 
have them released in a wider fashion, and these 10 tracks will be the 
large attraction of the set to a seasoned Chem. Bros. Fan, even if most 
of them have been more widley heard in different forms and styles over 
the years.

Most casual fans of the band would not have ever heard of the EBW 
series. People who buy everything they do will be pleased with the 
second disc, and somewhat bored of the first, whilst more general fans 
may use it aimlessly plug a gap in their collection they can enjoy 
whilst cooking or doing the housework. "Brotherhood" is by no means bad, 
but a bit redundant : if you like the band, you've probably got the 
previous compilation, and the band have not released enough material 
over the past five years to justify a new Hits compilation. If you 
haven't got the previous one, this is a great place to start. If you 
have the previous one, buy the double CD set for the "Electronic Battle 
Weapons" stuff or don't bother at all.

It's your choice. You could always buy food or or a donkey for a third 
world country or something.



I can't help feeling that you would have to be really, *really* bored to 
write such a huge amount of text to say that you don't like something. I 
mean, really, if you hate the music of the Chemical Brothers so much... 
why expend so much effort talking about it? I simple "I didn't like this 
much" would suffice. :-P

It just seems a little strange to me. Sure, people are going to write 
long epics about how much they *like* things, but dislikes??

Oh well... I guess people are strange! :-D

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4932c136@news.povray.org...

[...]

> I can't help feeling that you would have to be really, *really* bored to
> write such a huge amount of text to say that you don't like something. I
> mean, really, if you hate the music of the Chemical Brothers so much...
> why expend so much effort talking about it? I simple "I didn't like this
> much" would suffice. :-P
>
> It just seems a little strange to me. Sure, people are going to write
> long epics about how much they *like* things, but dislikes??
>
> Oh well... I guess people are strange! :-D

I agree. I've even seen some people write incessantly about how boring their
work is, how stupid their bosses are, how much they dislike working there...
etc. Strange indeed.

Post a reply to this message

>> Oh well... I guess people are strange! :-D
> 
> I agree. I've even seen some people write incessantly about how boring their
> work is, how stupid their bosses are, how much they dislike working there...
> etc. Strange indeed.

Except that you *must* deal with your boss, and there's no escaping it.

On the other hand, if you don't like a particular piece of music... 
don't listen to it? :-P

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I can't help feeling that you would have to be really, *really* bored to
> write such a huge amount of text to say that you don't like something. I
> mean, really, if you hate the music of the Chemical Brothers so much...
> why expend so much effort talking about it? I simple "I didn't like this
> much" would suffice. :-P
>
> It just seems a little strange to me. Sure, people are going to write
> long epics about how much they *like* things, but dislikes??

People like to talk about what they like and also what they dislike, perhaps
even more the latter, going long ways to explain in minutiae why they don't
like it.  Gossip, anyone?

I like the Chemical Brothers, but I don't think this style of electronic music
should be judged by "melodic lines" like the dude did:  electronica allows for
far more vast musical landscapes than any acoustic music.

BTW, people who urge for music with "melodic lines" in "songs" also tend not
enjoy Bach and most harmony-first-melody-last classical music either.  And
these people are boring. :P

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message

> Except that you *must* deal with your boss, and there's no escaping it.

Sure there is. All it takes is a piece of paper with a few words on it.

Post a reply to this message

somebody wrote:

> Sure there is. All it takes is a piece of paper with a few words on it.

At the very least, 2 words. :)

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 08:08:15 -0600, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
wrote:

>somebody wrote:
>
>> Sure there is. All it takes is a piece of paper with a few words on it.
>
>At the very least, 2 words. :)

At the very, very least, 2 letters.
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
news:4at7j4lusb3pccu93i8nr90t15llvdlh8h@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 08:08:15 -0600, Mike Raiford 
> <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>somebody wrote:
>>
>>> Sure there is. All it takes is a piece of paper with a few words on it.
>>
>>At the very least, 2 words. :)
>
> At the very, very least, 2 letters.

   Or a backward slash and a forward slash...

    ~Steve~



> -- 
>
> Regards
>     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 18:25:39 -0000, "St." <dot### [at] dotcom> wrote:

>
>"Stephen" <mcavoysAT@aolDOTcom> wrote in message 
>news:4at7j4lusb3pccu93i8nr90t15llvdlh8h@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 01 Dec 2008 08:08:15 -0600, Mike Raiford 
>> <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>somebody wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sure there is. All it takes is a piece of paper with a few words on it.
>>>
>>>At the very least, 2 words. :)
>>
>> At the very, very least, 2 letters.
>
>   Or a backward slash and a forward slash...
>

Thinks! LOL.

The Yanks may not get it :)
-- 

Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Stephen wrote:
> The Yanks may not get it :)

We may use a different gesture, but we're not *quite* so provincial to never 
have seen a soccer fan.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   The NFL should go international. I'd pay to
   see the Detroit Lions vs the Roman Catholics.

Post a reply to this message