Jump to content

Talk:The Chemical Brothers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Cyberbot II (talk | contribs) at 19:52, 27 August 2015 (Notification of altered sources needing review (Peachy 2.0 (alpha 8))). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Removed possible copyright infringement. Text that was previously posted here is the same as text from this webpage: http://www.planet-dust.net/history.htm

To the poster: If there was permission to use this material under terms of our license or if you are the copyright holder of the externally linked text, then please indicate so on this talk page.

See two paragraphs below... -mrbartjens 18:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't document anything. Douglasr007 04:08, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced statements

The whole article contains only one source, which I have just added. A lot of the information in the article I could not find anywhere else except on pages copying this wikipedia article. Please add sources! The current situation is quite unacceptable for an article such as this one -mrbartjens 08:44, 16 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright holder of Chemical Brothers history text

I am the copyright holder of the Chemical Brothers history text, and webmaster of http://www.planet-dust.net. I am re-posting an edited version of the history text in Wikipedia.

Miuzi

The spelling of the PE track is actually "Miuzi..." and not "My Uzi...". Check the album "Yo! Bum Rush the Show". wathiik.

Ariel

I see that "sea of beats" is attributed to Ariel. I think that it was actually released under the name A-Tom and was just Tom Rowlands.

Fight Club Soundtrack

Did the Chemical Brothers actually produce the Fight Club Soundtrack? I must say I am rather confused. Both the Fight Club and Dust Brothers wikipedia articles say the Dust Brothers wrote it, but the opening credits of Fight Club says "Music by the Chemical Brothers"

Nope, the opening credits say "music by the Dust Brothers." TheEXIT 14:29, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Flip the Switch" removed from discography...

I decided to remove "Flip the Switch" from the discography. "Flip the Switch" is a fan project and has no affiliation with The Chemical Brothers (http://www.chemicalbrothersremixed.com/main.html). By all means it can be referred to within the article, but a discography should reflect official releases from the artists themselves. I hope this justifies its removal!

Backwards???

Who put that if you play Push the Button backwards the beats correspond to Come With Us? That sounds pretty bogus, dude, I've listend to both albums extensively and that can't be true. - Nathan Greenhalgh I deleted it because it's not sourced to anything, which is Wikipedia's policy blahblah... and it's just bizarre, the beats don't line up at all. If anyone knows otherwise, please post and explain why. - Nathan Greenhalgh 5/29/07

Anti-Nazi Mix?

Wasn't the Anti-Nazi Mix release a precursor to Brother's Gonna Work It Out? I know it was a promo-only release, but I'm surprised that there is no mention of it in the entry for the band.

I'm surprised too. I think Brother's Gonna Work It Out basically deleted the Sgt. Pepper's remix because of copyright issues. But Anti-Nazi mix was the bomb, and it a lot of people got into the Chems before this commercial release occurred.

What does this mean?

He left school with 11 O levels and 3 A-levels

Can someone explain to me what does "O level" mean? Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Not everyone is familiar with British education system you know. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.137.123.226 (talk) 19:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Pardon me for stating the obvious, but you are on Wikipedia. General Certificate of Education is what you've been looking for all along. RTFW. :] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheEXIT (talk • contribs) 14:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Why the arrogance after asking an innocent question? — Preceding unsigned comment added by KipNoxzema (talk • contribs) 09:23, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He's british. 96.42.21.232 (talk) 11:27, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bias?

This article (especially the part concerning their newer works) seems kind of biased to me.. using words like "genius piece" and such. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 154.20.223.116 (talk) 00:49, 29 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Cleanup

I think someone should add simple info about how many #1 chart simgles they have had (i'd rather leave it to a veteran editor than do it my self.) Please include U.S. AND U.K. charts. Smudger94 (talk) 20:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is excessive info about movies and video games that use chemical brothers songs, I think this should be moved to a different sections, but not sure where? Discography? Pop culture? Is there some standard for this sort of thing? Anyone have a suggestion? BusyBeingJack (talk) 22:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC) BusyBeingJack (talk) 22:52, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:PushtheButton.albumcover.jpg

Image:PushtheButton.albumcover.jpg 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 04:01, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did a major cleanup and removed most external links, except for the official site and a few fansites that do contain extensive and useful info. Some links seemed to be references rather than just links (lots of reviews), but this is quite hard to check of course. -mrbartjens 15:15, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More info required and POV

At the same Turnmills gig, the Brothers also played a previously un-released song at midnight to welcome 2007 which went down well with the crowd

Not only is a citation needed as mentioned in the main article but more info would be nice on the name of the track played.

Many are left wondering if the latest in the Electronic Battle Weapon series were simply one off genius pieces or signal a new direction they could take with the new album, perhaps swaying from their genre defining 'big beat' psychedelic albums of the past.

I believe this is the authors POV as I think if anything the new album takes the Chems back to their roots after recent albums like Push the Button and Come with Us. -- RND  T  C  10:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article is rubbish right now frankly, with tons of unsourced claims. I'm waiting for some biographical material about the Brothers I have bought, when I get those I'll hopefully get around to cleaning up the article. -mrbartjens 13:58, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
cool, thanks for the update. -- RND  T  C  15:59, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Which is Which?

One thing this article doesn't say is which one is Tom and which one is Ed. Can anyone shed some light? Technohead1980 (talk) 14:10, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Photo in the "Live" Section

The photo in the "Live" section is terrible. It's a blurry mess of color, and you can't make out that there are people in it at all, much less the Chemical Brothers. Does anybody have a higher quality or generally better image that would illustrate the live performances of the Chemical Brothers? If not, I say the image gets deleted. -Lamarcus (talk) 09:16, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This photo is pathetic and is nothing short of a joke. I suggest it is removed.Reqluce (talk) 20:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded new image:

Ed is on the left and Tom on the right.

T-95 (talk) 23:46, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

signed vinyls?

I didn't see anything related to this in the article.

I just got the We Are The Night 2 disc vinyl and in the middle of each disc is a phrase scribbled in with a number, for example:

Side C: ASW94158C Anyone for jerk chicken? Side D: AWW94158D Dogs on Gunpowder

Anyone have anything to compare this to? Thank you.

12.164.197.10 (talk) 22:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)S[reply]

What happened?

When did the article become so small? What happened to the history part? Who edited all of that? That was a ridiculous decision.

-Nathan Greenhalgh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.105.149.111 (talk) 05:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this is much better. Thanks to whoever took care of it. 6/5/08 The Chemical Brothers are an important enough group to deserve a history section. I mean, if a group like Motley Crue can get that, so should the Chems.

-Nathan Greenhalgh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.211.119.60 (talk) 21:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Electronic Battle Weapon series

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Right now there are ten short articles that have little scope for expansion. I propose that it would be better if they were all merged into a new article, something like Electronic Battle Weapon, and create a comprehensive article that doesn't require clicking into different pages. ~ ► Wykebjs ◄ (userpage | talk) 14:39, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- If no one objects, i suggest you go and merge. 82.46.235.71 (talk) 14:37, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- I concur, there's no point in having a stub article for each of these releases; the content of each of them is largely cut&paste in similarity. Have each of the original names point to the new combined article; further additions to the series can undergo the same treatment. MRuss (talk) 19:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strong agree, per comments above. --Soetermans | is listening | what he'd do now? 09:06, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

-merge it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.105.96.186 (talk) 09:22, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Go ahead! It'll really help, and it'll save time! --66richardson | is listening —Preceding undated comment added 11:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please could anyone convert these quotes to reliable references?

Ariel symbolically ended when deConstruction asked us for a Dust Brothers remix of an Ariel track. That was the final nail in the coffin.

— Ed Simons

One of the blokes went a bit mad, but now he's back at college, and the other one drives our van

— Tom Rowlands on Ariel, in 1995

Minimac (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures for 'Midnight Madness'

Does anybody know how to upload a single cover? I want one for Midnight Madness.

--213.83.125.225 (talk) 08:28, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chemical Brothers songs. PLEASE ANSWER :-D

I really want there to be an article of 'List of Chemical Brothers songs'. Muse have one, Radiohead have one, Queen have one etc. etc. the list goes on. As i don't have an account i can't do it myself and even if i get an account it would be a disaster trying to make one. So can anyone else start one. There are three different types of song lists. I think it should be like the Radiohead one, which lists the songs in chronological order. the Queen one llists songs in alphabetical order and the Muse one listts them by album, single, B-Side, etc. etc. --213.83.125.225 (talk) 08:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's a great idea, especially considering the Chems have plenty of non-album/obscure B-side tracks that the casual fan doesn't know about. And I too like the idea of using the Radiohead format, as it clearly indicates what release each song is from, including mutiple releases if necessary (this is definitely revelant to the Chems back catalogue). However I'm not sure that a list of Chemical Brothers songs would be notable enough to be on Wiki, as the Chemical Brothers haven't quite achieved the same level of success as Muse, Radiohead and Queen. Any thoughts? Demonofthefall (talk) 06:46, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, i think you gave a pretty good reason yourself why The Chemical Brothers should warrant a song list. And as for sucess, the band have had two UK #1s and, five UK #1 albums, and so on for their UK sucess. Whilst in the US, they did win a grammy.--90.210.196.87 (talk) 17:49, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, i saw this conversation and i have gone ahead and made one at List of The Chemical Brothers songs. If the article is in any help then please feel free to help it out.--TangoTizerWolfstone (talk) 18:59, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

C Class deserving? (wikiproject electronic music)

I have read the category in the wikiproject electronic music and it has been given a start class grade. I beleive that it should be upgraded to the C Class grade but I do not know how to nominate it for C Class. Any help would be appreciated. Yousou (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Live section issue.

Since when did the Live section become a patchy list of all the recent gigs they've done? I think that it should be limited to their more notable appearences, e.g. Olympus 2008, the Roundhouse shows in 2010, Coachella 2009, etc.

It at least needs some cleaning up, it's looking pretty messy at the moment.

64.20.65.131 (talk) 23:13, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Speaking of the Live Section, why not some information about their cutting-edge stage lighting and effects? KipNoxzema (talk) 09:26, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the past year or so I've noticed an increase in bands with separate pages for each tour they do, and I really think the Chems are deserving of this. They are well-known for their use of lights, visuals, lasers etc (just being pretty awesome live all-round really :) ) and they've only got bigger and better over time. I think at the very least the We Are the Night and Further tours merit their own article. Thoughts? Demonofthefall (talk) 08:02, 6 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Yes! I am all for that idea! I'm not sure if we can warrant a separate page for every single tour they've done, but one article with details on their live set-up, and year-by-year sections describing the style and typical setlists of each tour would be excellent. And I think it's especially appropriate now, with the recent release of Don't Think. If someone could start that page, I could supply loads of information. 64.20.65.131 (talk) 19:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical

Does anyone know why the name "Chemical Brothers"? If so which chemical are they? Is it acidic? What's it pH level? 92.39.202.71 (talk) 19:13, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At first they were called the Dust Brothers, after the US production duo of the same name (those guys did the Fight Club soundtrack among other things). They got famous, the original Dust Brothers threatened to sue, so they changed their name to The Chemical Brothers, after their one of their signature songs Chemical Beats.

The Chemical Brothers may be tellurium, since the chemical symbol for tellurium is Te, which would be the first letter of Tom and Ed's names.

147.226.205.90 (talk) 23:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on The Chemical Brothers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:52, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Chemical_Brothers&oldid=678170695"