- Summary: The long-awaited follow-up to My Bloody Valentine's 1991 classic shoegaze album Loveless was made available on its website.
- Record Label: Self-released
- Genre(s): Pop/Rock, Alternative/Indie Rock, Alternative Pop/Rock, Indie Pop, Dream Pop, Noise Pop, Shoegaze
- More Details and Credits »
Feb 6, 2013You get lost in it, and if you're wired a certain way that mixture of desire and confusion is easy to map on to the wider world. For 22 years, the only way to get there was through Loveless and its associated EPs; now there's another path, one many of us never expected to find.
UncutMar 1, 2013Overall, then, mbv is more of a time capsule than a box of surprises, but the contents have survived in immaculate condition. [Apr 2013, p.64]
Feb 11, 2013The album’s major problem, more than anything, is that such a flabbergastingly brilliant end stretch hints at a better record that might have been, a furiously abrasive set of drum’n’gaze (sorry) that would have completely blindsided all of us, rather than the enjoyable grab bag of dreamy old and in yer face new that we in fact get.
Feb 8, 2013devastatingly good, and nearly miraculous given the fact that this album had 22 years of hype behind it. i agree with some reviewer who saiddevastatingly good, and nearly miraculous given the fact that this album had 22 years of hype behind it. i agree with some reviewer who said it's a third part opera old school mbv, new material, antidote i would actually simplify it guitars, synthesizers, percussion. the music is dynamic, some songs are forceful and ferocious, others are smooth, gentle, romantic, they all intertwine, they build on one another. it's a welcome resurgence of the beauty of the electric guitar, and a clear pointer towards new directions the band hopefully continues to follow. ace.… Expand
Mar 25, 2013M B V. Superb and fresh. After 22 years, My Bloody Valentine are back and with a near-super record. By far, the good things are its strongM B V. Superb and fresh. After 22 years, My Bloody Valentine are back and with a near-super record. By far, the good things are its strong songwriting. Definitely buy it. Go Now!… Expand
May 7, 2017The Gods of shoegazing returned. M B V may not be as good as Loveless, but decisively better than 99% of contemporary productions. KevinThe Gods of shoegazing returned. M B V may not be as good as Loveless, but decisively better than 99% of contemporary productions. Kevin Shields and company deliver yet another incredible hour of musical journey through the inner spaces of their own dark souls, which is not comparable to the most of albums released over the last twenty years.… Expand
Feb 8, 2013Holy moley! A new MBV album. How long has it been? Well that crappy Kevin Costner-in-tights movie had just come out, and Paula Abdul still hadHoly moley! A new MBV album. How long has it been? Well that crappy Kevin Costner-in-tights movie had just come out, and Paula Abdul still had songs on the radio…that long. So is it any good? Yes. Does it have swirling guitars and new sounds to blow your mind? Yep. (More jet engine!) Is it better than Loveless? Nope. But it’s an adequate follow up (which is a monumental compliment) and an interesting, totally worthy record in its own right. For those not familiar with this band…it might be a tough introduction. There are no singles here. Just heavy guitars, drowned out vocals, and complex melodies that sometimes require a few spins. Listen to it with headphones. Listen to it loud. Enjoy! Thanks for not disappointing Kevin Shields. A-…or 9/10. Cheers! –CCC… Expand
Apr 16, 2013Beautiful! what can you say...
I wasnt even born when they start, but im so glad they're back
its not so intense and deep as loveless but iBeautiful! what can you say...
I wasnt even born when they start, but im so glad they're back
its not so intense and deep as loveless but i think they scored very good with this one!… Expand
Jan 24, 2014While it was understandable that a new My Bloody Valentine record would generate excitement, the level of excitement that surrounded thisWhile it was understandable that a new My Bloody Valentine record would generate excitement, the level of excitement that surrounded this record was bordering on ridiculous. A lot has happened in the 21 + years since the release of Loveless both in and outside of music and while the sonic experimentation of Shields and co in the early 90's was remarkable, we've had two decades of other bands building on the mbv blueprint with varying degrees of success. Technology has changed to such as extent that while Loveless cost a reportedly 250 grand to make, a similar record could be made today using a laptop and some nice effects for a fraction of the cost. Ok, I might be exaggerating there but you hopefully get the point. The big question was whether the new record, cleverly titled "mbv" was going to be worth the wait. The answer for me is a qualified yes. At times mbv sounds like Loveless II (no bad thing), other times it sounds like a collection of Loveless B-Sides (a tad underwhelming and lacking direction), then at other times it just hops into a parallell universe and My Bloody Valentine are unrecognisable in the music (pleasantly surprises).
I like the record but ironically, the disappointing thing about mbv by My Bloody Valentine is that for the most part, it does exactly what we expected it to. Surprises are rare. Also, considering the length of the time the band took over the record, there is a little bit of filler on the record (not much but did we really need over 3 minutes of the "Nothing Is" loop?). mbv, while released in 2013, is arguably a record for fans of the 90's. I'm not complaining about the release of this album though, its got enough substance to sit proudly with their back catalogue and now that the monkey is off the back, perhaps the band can move on and try their hand at a record for the 2010's.… Expand
Feb 26, 2013I wish Talk Talk had come out of retirement instead. M B V sounds like Loveless with all the substance removed. I would review it in detail,I wish Talk Talk had come out of retirement instead. M B V sounds like Loveless with all the substance removed. I would review it in detail, but despite having listened five times I still couldn't say what it sounded like.… Expand
Awards & Rankings
|OK Computer: OKNOTOK 1997-2017 - Radiohead|
|Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band [50th Anniversary Edition Deluxe Version] - The Beatles|
|Purple Rain [Deluxe Expanded Edition] - Prince and the Revolution|
|DAMN. - Kendrick Lamar|
|Lovely Creatures: The Best of Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds, 1984-2014 [Box Set] - Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds|
|Kickin Child: Lost Columbia Album 1965 - Dion|
|A Crow Looked at Me - Mount Eerie|
|Singles [Original Motion Picture Soundtrack] [Deluxe Edition] - Various Artists|
|Melodrama - Lorde|
|The Joshua Tree [30th Anniversary Super Deluxe Edition] - U2|
|Black Origami - Jlin|
|Eternity, In Your Arms - Creeper|
|Leftism 22 [Reissue] - Leftfield|
|The Order of Time - Valerie June|
|Big Fish Theory - Vince Staples|
|The Thin Black Duke - Oxbow|
|Fantasizing About Being Black - Otis Taylor|
|Guppy - Charly Bliss|
|More Scared of You than You Are of Me - The Smith Street Band|
|Arca - Arca|