Did anybody see the review of "Further" in the latest Q magazine?
Pretty positive I thought really.

link?

I can't find it online, it's in the latest issue - they gave it four stars out of five

pushpop, on 25 May 2010 - 05:56 PM, said:

That's good news if true. I really despise Q and UK music mags in general, they're all so self important. The Word probably being the worst, pages and pages of self aggrandizing bloated editorial. I've discovered some good music via its free CD mind you. Q have never really given any of the more recent Chems albums great reviews other than WATN. The UK music press have never really understood dance music or anything approaching it and because the Chems cross a few different genres I don't think that has ever gone down well. Music critics by and large just don't like anything that isn't easily pigeon holed.

Hopefully Q have finally woken up after giving great albums like Come With Us and Push the Button very dodgy reviews.

I read it last week, and was pleasantly surprised of the review. I've read Q for years, but their reviews can be hit and miss - what way is the wind blowing kind of thing. Anyway, if anyone's interested, I can scan it next week (working away from home this week)

graysquire1969, on 25 May 2010 - 08:40 PM, said:

Wow, the chems must be fashionable again!? Q's ethos on reviews has always baffled me, but I'm pleased they have given it four stars, not since DYOH have they been so generous correct me if I am wrong?

PS - Is it a big article? Worth buying Q Mag I mean? or do they just touch the surface?

VMan, on 25 May 2010 - 08:56 PM, said:

It was a half-page review so it wasn't buried away among the more obscure releases of the month. He (the reviewer) commented on how the Chems have "never released a dud" but that before Further, all the albums seemed to follow a template of instrumental tracks with "northern bloke"/"quirky american female vocalist" which was growing tired, and Further breaks it (kinda)

He mentioned that "Escape Velocity" is full-on energy with lots of build-ups and releases while having a droning synth reminiscent of a raga, which was quite a good observation I thought, and also how Swoon sounded like it was influenced by My Bloody Valentine. Overall, the review mentioned that Further lived up to its name as a move forward for the bros.

The music press dont really know what to do with the CBs these days it seems. One minute they are saying that they have just spent the last decade remaking their first three albums and that their moment passed at the turn of the century, while other times praising their live performances and their ability to electrify their fans both on disc and live. *shrugs*

@PUSHPOP - Ahhhhh thanks so much for sharing that mate, cheers thats great. Will try and nip to smiths to have a butchers!

Cheers again

VMan, on 25 May 2010 - 08:56 PM, said:

I remember Q giving Surrender a good review at the time, 4 stars I think.

mcmarsh, on 25 May 2010 - 11:50 PM, said:

Yeah, then they gave CWU three stars and PTB two, the buggers! Dunno what WATN got..anybody know?

Thank you, pushpop - you have always come through with a heads up on what's in print.

I used to read Q all the time but do agree with Toby about the mag being self important. I think that's just the nature of those types of magazines, though. It seemed the Chemical Brothers were the darlings of Q magazine once upon a time. I still have the one where Tom is on the cover holding up Keith Richards from the Q awards - from the Surrender era. So it was naturally disappointing to see less than favorable Chems reviews.

I'm pleased to hear they gave Further 4 out of 5 stars! I know we shouldn't care what the critics think - but good press is good press, right?

Yeah definitely! It's important to bear in mind that music by it's very nature is totally subjective and subject to the interpretation of a given listener. It just annoys me the way the music press write opinion-as-fact, as not many musicians set out to make a shit record, yet Q and NME happily tear months or even years of hard work to pieces in a few sentences. I suppose though by handing over 6.50 for Q in a newsagents I implicitly showed interest in their opinion I remember reading about Ed being furious at NME for slating Push The Button, and I really loved that album.

One thing that's always intrigued me is just how long Tom and Ed spend making a record - how many tracks do they create during the production process of a record, and how they decide what to keep and what to put on b-sides and what to leave out entirely.

I have to say I have never been as excited by a Chems album as this one. I'm a massive fan of any kind of music which incorporates escapist or psychedelic motifs in it, and from what I've heard online and particularly the Roundhouse videos uploaded this week, Further is gonna be a feast of both

pushpop, on 26 May 2010 - 01:55 AM, said:

I think like any artist/band they create many possible workings that never make the cut, and then maybe five years later the Bass makes the cut on the lead single on the next album...

As with Q, pretty sure they only gave Surrender 3 stars I can visualise it, which I thought was insane, that album (hence my avatar...I know) was worthy of at least 4 if not the 5 'CLASSIC' they proclaim.

I remember that album cover to Whirly, I just wonder if Tom and Ed would do that sort of tongue in cheek thing now, not that that was a silly thing to do, or that is was wrong, because after all, Q as Much as I hate to admit it are one of the first music magazines you think of when you here "Music magazine", so again, yes ALL good press is good press, but the Chems have never been concerned with image which is what I love, and why they are still current.

I remember Q also doing 2/3 page a fly on the wall docu report in a Jan/Feb 2002 issue for CWU, over in Japan. Memorable parts were that Tom and Ed were taking part in a Japanese radio interview with very stupid questions, one on the subject of lead single Star Guitar, "So, ahhh who plays the guitars"? It sort of focussed on Tom and Ed being a 'Morcombe & Wise' sort of couple, strange concept which to this day I'm not sure if Tom or Ed endorsed. But since then, I can't recall them doing a special on them, just a few pages would be at least an acknowledgement to one of the most successful electronic acts to have ever been.

PS: Is Q really £6.50 now!? Jumping Jack...FLASH!