I don’t have a theoretical language for music. I’m really inspired by sculpture, so I like to say, ‘you’re not making music, you’re creating a space. You’re building a room, putting some objects in it, and seeing what happens to the objects over time.’

Games is like hardwired plumbing in the house of pop. It's not pop itself, its sort of like the behind-the-scenes arteries and capillaries of pop music.

I think, if you can only talk about your stuff in a jargonistic way, you're not as smart as you think. You're alienating people who deserve to have a conversation, or a place in the conversation. If you take the complete inverse and are staunchly anti-intellectual, then I think there's a certain amount of resentfulness in that. There's something about that standpoint that feels a little bit insecure.

I'm interested in philosophy, I studied it, and I also admit I try to read things that are way above me. I have a limit: I take what I need from it, and I do find that some of my favourite philosophical writings tend to be poppier. I admire smart people who are able to describe things simply or in a human, readable way.

We seem to invest so much time and belief that those things are stable in some way - something to build towards, or something to use to better understand where we come from. So often those expectations are just so out of line with how the universe works. I don't see it as a productive way of seeing the world, so, when I deal with that stuff formally - or when I try to allow it to inspire me - I'm open to it twisting itself up.

It's such a contentious thing to get people in a room and just say, "go!"

I always fear with music that it can be too immediate - too geared toward a "get addicted to it and throw it away" mentality. I get so melancholic once I fall out of love with a piece of music, and I try to make music that I think will at least able to grow with me as I get older.