M B V - My Bloody Valentine
M B V Image

Universal acclaim - based on 46 Critics What's this?

User Score

Universal acclaim- based on 143 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • 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 »
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 45 out of 46
  2. Negative: 0 out of 46
  1. The perfect album, albums with no filler, albums that when over, leave you breathless and don't inspire you to want more music from the band, but make you want to listen to the album from the start, all over again; m b v is that album.
  2. Feb 6, 2013
    It sounds amazing, and represents an astounding return.
  3. Feb 6, 2013
    You 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.
  4. Feb 7, 2013
    While there’s nothing quite as disorienting and alien as Loveless’s dramatic opening song, Only Shallow, there’s notable evolution in both the songwriting and sound, and the overall flow of the album actually seems tighter.
  5. Mar 1, 2013
    Overall, 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]
  6. Feb 11, 2013
    The 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.
  7. Feb 6, 2013
    It’s a good album, but not a great one, and though the long tail of history will eventually render such a long production time moot, it’s certainly not a record justifying the ludicrous wait.

See all 46 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 27
  2. Negative: 2 out of 27
  1. Feb 8, 2013
    devastatingly 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
  2. Feb 11, 2013
    An almost perfect near-masterpiece comeback album of the year-I tried to be realistic about it and not to expect miracle after all this time but this is even better than I hoped it would be. Expand
  3. Apr 30, 2013
    A lot of people are going to be hung up on the question of whether or not MBV lives up to Loveless, and if you ask me, it does. MBV is just as cohesive, just as beautiful, and it doesn't look back to the band's former greatness. Most of these songs rip Loveless tracks to shreds in terms of craftsmanship. It took some work for me, but MBV is the real deal. Give it your attention and you'll be thankful in the end. Expand
  4. Feb 8, 2013
    Holy 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
  5. Apr 16, 2013
    Beautiful! 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
  6. Oct 15, 2013
    It's been a long time since their last album (which is the defining album for shoegaze). This album doesn't quite live up to that however, it is still a great release capable of delivering a pleasant listening experience. The second half of the album is much better than the first half which sometimes feels as though it is trying to rehash Loveless. Expand
  7. Feb 26, 2013
    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

See all 27 User Reviews

Related Articles

  1. The Best Albums of 2013

    The Best Albums of 2013 Image
    Published: December 19, 2013
    We reveal our final official list of 2013's highest-scoring albums.
  2. Midyear Report: The Best Albums of 2013 So Far

    Midyear Report: The Best Albums of 2013 So Far Image
    Published: July 3, 2013
    We reveal the top 25 albums of the first half of 2013. While the list includes rare releases from the likes of My Bloody Valentine, Daft Punk, and Boards of Canada, it's a metal band that tops our chart.