The Campfire Headphase

I know this interview has probably been discussed lots here before, but I've often wondered about why my feelings about TCH were that it was a little self-conscious sounding... (if not also beautifully produced.)

http://pitchfork.com/features/interviews/6151-boards-of-canada/

The new record is probably the slowest record that we've done. And it's got guitars on it as well. This is something that we've done slightly deliberately. We knew that we had to break away from this thing. It bothered us that if you go into the big stores our stuff is always sitting in the dance music section. We never made a dance record in our entire career but our stuff stilll gets thrown in there. Our drive with this record is to try and get us out of the dance section and into the main section with all the others bands, like ABBA and A-Ha.

//

We've really experienced high expectation regarding the new record, partly because it took such a long time. And we think this works against us as well.

//

Pitchfork: Is The Campfire Headphase a direct reaction for you on Geogaddi?

Mike: Yes, to some extent I think it is. The whole mood of this record is really uplifting and happy generally. It's really a case of saying: All the mystery and magic and all this kind of nonsense that built up around the last record got to a point where it was just silly.

And so on.

I'm sure I also read one or two other interviews from the time which had a similar streak running through them. I hope this same pressure isn't putting them off ever putting out the next album! There is nothing for them to prove.

i'm hoping for the upcoming record they are completely blocking out all thoughts of the outside world and are making the record they want to make, not the record they think people are expecting.

people expect geogadi II

the only people who have a problem with TCH are idiots

its their best album easily.

  On 11/25/2010 at 5:31 AM, MAXIMUS MISCHIEF said:

the only people who have a problem with TCH are idiots

 

its their best album easily.

what makes this their best album?

I like TCH, but after about 20 listens i found it's missing the atmosphere and depth that their first two albums are overbrimming with. And music wise I think it's their most un-interesting work. There's definitely a lack of creativity on this one compared to MHTRTC and Geo. I love the concept but that's all I really took from this album.

from the interviews i read it seems their main inspiration for writing this album was to avoid classification as a band, and I think that's an awful reason to write music. musicians should definitely listen to criticisms and learn from them, but trying to please people or deliberately confuse them is wack. musicians should write music they want to hear, or write as if no one's going to listen to it in the first place.

  On 11/25/2010 at 5:31 AM, MAXIMUS MISCHIEF said:

the only people who really really like TCH are idiots.

 

its easily their worst album.

fixed. ;)

from the interviews i read it seems their main inspiration for writing this album was to avoid classification as a band, and I think that's an awful reason to write music. musicians should definitely listen to criticisms and learn from them, but trying to please people or deliberately confuse them is wack. musicians should write music they want to hear, or write as if no one's going to listen to it in the first place.

I agree with this.

That's why I love this music. It even sounds so free from all those shackles - those magic moments when you first heard SAW 85-92, or Tri Repetae, or Hard Normal Daddy - or indeed BoC's releases preceding TCH - that magic came from the fact the music sounded like nothing else, like it just written itself.

Of course some artists and bands have more of a dialog with an audience and trends and categories and all that, and respond to those factors more blatantly - but the whole reason I loved BoC was that before, it never sounding like it was trying to do something. It was so effortless and uncompromisingly unique.

To be honest, when I first heard TCH I thought it was desperately friendly sounding and boring. It's since grown on me because of its fine attention to detail and its production, but I think it's easily their worst. If it didn't have BoC on the cover I'm sure I'd have taken much notice.

  On 11/25/2010 at 7:29 PM, Lianne said:

from the interviews i read it seems their main inspiration for writing this album was to avoid classification as a band, and I think that's an awful reason to write music. musicians should definitely listen to criticisms and learn from them, but trying to please people or deliberately confuse them is wack. musicians should write music they want to hear, or write as if no one's going to listen to it in the first place.

 

I agree with this.

 

That's why I love this music. It even sounds so free from all those shackles - those magic moments when you first heard SAW 85-92, or Tri Repetae, or Hard Normal Daddy - or indeed BoC's releases preceding TCH - that magic came from the fact the music sounded like nothing else, like it just written itself.

 

Of course some artists and bands have more of a dialog with an audience and trends and categories and all that, and respond to those factors more blatantly - but the whole reason I loved BoC was that before, it never sounding like it was trying to do something. It was so effortless and uncompromisingly unique.

 

To be honest, when I first heard TCH I thought it was desperately friendly sounding and boring. It's since grown on me because of its fine attention to detail and its production, but I think it's easily their worst. If it didn't have BoC on the cover I'm sure I'd have taken much notice.

inspiration for writing music is different than choosing music to release onto an album...i think understanding TCH as a response to geogaddi is a better means to come to terms with it. you have to remember theyre hippies and probably got to feeling like they were imparting too much mysterious and negative energy and wanted to make an album that people could have a good trip too. still i dont see TCH as being all flowers and rainbows and I recall them saying that they imagined someone on acid compressing tons of memories and thoughts over a few hours in front of a campfire and I really feel this idea communicated through the music (particularly in the placement of the chromatic glissandos). I think it has a real time stretching quality (slow this bird down) and loneliness about its conclusion where is geogaddi is very much the opossite, coming out of the dark

edit: plus the guitar sections are well composed and applied, good for them

music isn't created by critics and committees. actually, almost nothing good is created by critics and committees.

tch, is a wonderful work. the album is emotionally complex without being overbearing. and yes, it is a great trip overall.

i think it's definitely their most organic album, which is why i have an easier time evaluating tch as a single work than i do with any of their other albums.

love it.

i'm definitely going to try listening to geogaddi and tch while tripping next weekend

tch perfects the atmosphere that boc has always wanted to do, that mhtrtc and geogaddi failed or came close to.

i think you people are mistaking the 'mystery' and hidden backwards voices for depth/creativity.

there is a fuck ton more depth in TCH, as far as atmosphere and sound and melody and well everything... it is just all around better than anything they ahve done. i think people get put off by the fact that the beats arent fat or that its not electronic or 'immediate' enough... its the kind of thing that requires multiple listens to wrap your mind around, and it seems like people wrote it off immediately after hearing it.

but yea.. if you are one of the people who is judging this music based on one out of context line from an interview then thats just really sad. then again, if you need your fat hiphop beats and obvious samples of children laughing or backwards spooky voices then this album just wasnt made for you.

hey maximus i wasn't trying to attack you, just stating my opinion on the album. instead of trying to put down others for not loving it or "understanding" it like you do why don't you tell us why you love it...

  On 11/25/2010 at 7:29 PM, Lianne said:

from the interviews i read it seems their main inspiration for writing this album was to avoid classification as a band, and I think that's an awful reason to write music. musicians should definitely listen to criticisms and learn from them, but trying to please people or deliberately confuse them is wack. musicians should write music they want to hear, or write as if no one's going to listen to it in the first place.

 

I agree with this.

 

That's why I love this music.

i don't think you understand what i meant here, if you love this music for the avoiding classification reason you should disagree with me

  On 11/26/2010 at 1:02 AM, Ricky Downtown said:

hey maximus i wasn't trying to attack you, just stating my opinion on the album. instead of trying to put down others for not loving it or "understanding" it like you do why don't you tell us why you love it...

 

  On 11/25/2010 at 7:29 PM, Lianne said:

from the interviews i read it seems their main inspiration for writing this album was to avoid classification as a band, and I think that's an awful reason to write music. musicians should definitely listen to criticisms and learn from them, but trying to please people or deliberately confuse them is wack. musicians should write music they want to hear, or write as if no one's going to listen to it in the first place.

 

I agree with this.

 

That's why I love this music.

 

i don't think you understand what i meant here, if you love this music for the avoiding classification reason you should disagree with me

I do agree with you - I meant that the music sounded as if it was made because the artist wanted to make it, and not for any other reason. It didn't sound like a reaction to the outside word or any ideas of genre and didn't sound self-conscious in any way.

  Quote

hey maximus i wasn't trying to attack you, just stating my opinion on the album. instead of trying to put down others for not loving it or "understanding" it like you do why don't you tell us why you love it...

i wasnt putting anyone down in that post. ive said why i love it. it accomplishes everything i think boc is about and perfects their sound in all aspects. them getting away and changing direction completely is the reason a lot of people felt alienated from it, and i think people were quick to judge. if people give this album a better chance and actually listen to it for what it is rather than being stuck on how it doesnt have quirky backwards vocals or hidden messages they would realize that there is a lot more to it than it seems.. complaining about lack of depth is ridiculous because in terms of sound this has more going on than any boc release. there are layers and layers upon layers of layers.. ive been listening to this since it came out and i still hear new things to this day.

another thing. that interview quote is bigtime out of context. they never stated that that was their main drive for creating this album. if you read other interviews you see that it was far from it.

I think there's a bit of truth to what everyone is saying here, for what it's worth here's my take:

- the cynical things Mike was saying in that interview should be taken with a grain of salt. Though I know where Lianne is coming from in terms of how each album sounds (I said something similar when Headphase came out, about it sounding a bit too calculated and "BoC trying to be BoC") I think there's some projection involved - who's to say they weren't just as conscious of what people were saying about them during the Geogaddi years? (an album which, incidentally, I find to be a bit self-consciously "spooky"). The fact is musicians rarely sound like what we expect them to sound like (in early interviews, unless they were talking about gear, Ae sounded like a couple of chavs and you'd never suspect they were brilliant musicians). And I'm willing to bet there are a lot of "petty" motivations for making music that lead to great albums - artists saying "oh, he think he can combine guitars and electronica? I'm gonna show him how it's done" or "they think they know me but I'm going to headfuck them" (pretty much Aphex's entire discography). I mean, the history of rock is basically a bunch of white guys stealing and warping black music, it doesn't get more cynical than that, yet the Beatles are fucking awesome. I don't think it really matters how petty the initial motivations were, as long as they spark off a creative storm, put enough fuel in the artist's "tank of inspiration" to keep them cranking.

- Campfire is my most listened to BoC album. I think it has the best flow and lush detailing. Is it their most commercial sounding? I'd have to say yes - Dayvan Cowboy in particular. But then, 1969 off of Geogaddi is damn commercial sounding too, apart from the voice sample on top. I don't think it is their most musically creative album however. And I think it peters out at the end, rather than ending with a punch.

- for me, the least self-conscious Boards releases are the Old Tunes tapes, which is why I love them. They capture some sort of unique mood, and they aren't afraid to be tongue-in-cheek or silly. I'd say the Beautiful Place EP was Boards last "un-self-conscious" sounding Boards release (and for me, their musical peak). I also really like the live performances from around that time, where they really stretch out the intro and let things become hypnotic. But each album has its charm. In any case, to get back to my point, I don't think it matters so much what the initial idea was, as long as the artist is inspired. Wanting to 1-up someone seems a valid inspiration, as long as it fuels creativity. RDJ album is about as self-myth-conscious as they come, but also brilliant. What worries me more is when artists sound tired or at odds with each other, which is also present in that interview. Which is why I'm fine with Boards taking as long as they want to get their shit together and find a concept that kicks their asses into action. Trans-Canada highway ep was beautiful overall, but also kind of boring and obvious, I thought.

- um, last point - having that "special something" or "it" or "x-factor" is too complex to break down into ingredients. Artistic inspiration seems to be a unique combination of youth, ego, experience, pride, joy, etc etc. There's no reason to expect lightning to strike once, twice, three times...most acts can only manage one hit single.

- tl;dr: Lianne has a point, but Headphase is a strong album nonetheless

  On 11/26/2010 at 1:27 AM, MAXIMUS MISCHIEF said:

  Quote

hey maximus i wasn't trying to attack you, just stating my opinion on the album. instead of trying to put down others for not loving it or "understanding" it like you do why don't you tell us why you love it...

 

i wasnt putting anyone down in that post. ive said why i love it. it accomplishes everything i think boc is about and perfects their sound in all aspects. them getting away and changing direction completely is the reason a lot of people felt alienated from it, and i think people were quick to judge. if people give this album a better chance and actually listen to it for what it is rather than being stuck on how it doesnt have quirky backwards vocals or hidden messages they would realize that there is a lot more to it than it seems.. complaining about lack of depth is ridiculous because in terms of sound this has more going on than any boc release. there are layers and layers upon layers of layers.. ive been listening to this since it came out and i still hear new things to this day.

 

another thing. that interview quote is bigtime out of context. they never stated that that was their main drive for creating this album. if you read other interviews you see that it was far from it.

word i didn't mean to imply that it was their main drive for writing this music, but it seemed like a big factor when i read the interviews. as if they put guitars in just to fuck with their fans, but i know that isn't entirely the case. they do love guitars despite some of their fans hating them

when i say "depth", i'm not referring to samples or layers of sounds, i'm referring to interpretations of the music itself. in that case i feel that MHTRTC and Geo have much more "depth", but I totally agree with you, TCH is much more detailed and layered than their previous albums.

  On 11/26/2010 at 1:57 AM, lumpenprol said:

I think it has the best flow and lush detailing. Is it their most commercial sounding? I'd have to say yes - Dayvan Cowboy in particular. But then, 1969 off of Geogaddi is damn commercial sounding too, apart from the voice sample on top. I don't think it is their most musically creative album however. And I think it peters out at the end, rather than ending with a punch.

- for me, the least self-conscious Boards releases are the Old Tunes tapes, which is why I love them. They capture some sort of unique mood, and they aren't afraid to be tongue-in-cheek or silly.

Totally agree, but I think Geo has a better flow track-wise. but hell, they've all got a great flow really!

it seems like there's a bunch of tch fans but i think it really comes down to what album of theirs you listened to first and loving that album.

  On 11/25/2010 at 11:29 PM, MAXIMUS MISCHIEF said:

tch perfects the atmosphere that boc has always wanted to do, that mhtrtc and geogaddi failed or came close to.

i think you people are mistaking the 'mystery' and hidden backwards voices for depth/creativity.

there is a fuck ton more depth in TCH, as far as atmosphere and sound and melody and well everything... it is just all around better than anything they ahve done. i think people get put off by the fact that the beats arent fat or that its not electronic or 'immediate' enough... its the kind of thing that requires multiple listens to wrap your mind around, and it seems like people wrote it off immediately after hearing it.

but yea.. if you are one of the people who is judging this music based on one out of context line from an interview then thats just really sad. then again, if you need your fat hiphop beats and obvious samples of children laughing or backwards spooky voices then this album just wasnt made for you.

TOTALLY AGREE!WELL SAID! Its on another level. I introduced Geogaddi, MHTRTC and TCH to a friend recently and she thought that all albums were great but TCH was the best of them and actually one of the best albums she ever heard in her life.

I think nostalgia is also a huge factor why people think MHTRTC is their favourite album by BOC (my least favourite album by BOC). For sure, when it came out it was on another level than other albums and it was a new style and all but I think TCH is the most timeless album by BOC so far.

Peace

My favorite album. Just find it nice

its funny they're talking about moving away from that boc sound/brand/band classification, and this is the promo image used:

could you get ANY boccier?

The best track on TCH wasn't even on it, Macquarie Ridge. If you catch my drift ...

blah blah blah blah

Campfire Headphase is excellent

  On 11/27/2010 at 8:59 PM, NewSchoolScience said:

The best track on TCH wasn't even on it, Macquarie Ridge. If you catch my drift ...

herp derp

  On 11/26/2010 at 10:04 PM, Archrival said:

I introduced Geogaddi, MHTRTC and TCH to a friend recently and she thought that all albums were great but TCH was the best of them

about 98% of women would probably choose the same ...

Just taking the piss, it's a good album. It was actually the first I heard but it's not my favourite.