https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxf6wQvRQ0s&NR=1&feature=fvwp
― Ask The Answer Man (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 6 February 2013 23:41 (thirteen years ago)
did they often close with Lovelee Sweet Darlene, or is this the show referenced upthread?
― Z S, Wednesday, 6 February 2013 23:51 (thirteen years ago)
different show, but hey
― Ask The Answer Man (sexyDancer), Wednesday, 6 February 2013 23:52 (thirteen years ago)
Did so done say up thread that they wished KS would do a new mix of something off Loveless (ideally Soon, iirc) as they think he's now much better at sonics? Because, iirc, the analogue remaster of Soon on the new CD set from last year IS a new mix? Or maybe the digital one? But basically each of the three versions of Soon on those rereleases (including the EPs disc version) is different, and one was done very recently because the original version had been lost. I'm sure he said that in the P4K interview he did last year.
― they all are afflicted with a sickness of existence (Scik Mouthy), Thursday, 7 February 2013 08:14 (thirteen years ago)
Someone not so done. Damn iPad.
― they all are afflicted with a sickness of existence (Scik Mouthy), Thursday, 7 February 2013 08:15 (thirteen years ago)
Yeah, bears repeating: Check out the analogue remaster.
― Mark G, Thursday, 7 February 2013 08:53 (thirteen years ago)
New MBV song titles: Someone Not So Done.
― Chewshabadoo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 08:54 (thirteen years ago)
so not gonna heppen
― licorice oratorio (baaderonixx), Thursday, 7 February 2013 09:27 (thirteen years ago)
that one, too.
― Mark G, Thursday, 7 February 2013 10:15 (thirteen years ago)
That One Too
― Chewshabadoo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 11:43 (thirteen years ago)
That One 2
Saw God supporting Bark Psychosis at the Garage in London, they were fantastic live.
― MaresNest, Thursday, 7 February 2013 11:57 (thirteen years ago)
Did so done say up thread that they wished KS would do a new mix of something off Loveless (ideally Soon, iirc) as they think he's now much better at sonics? Because, iirc, the analogue remaster of Soon on the new CD set from last year IS a new mix? Or maybe the digitalone? But basically each of the three versions of Soon on those rereleases (including the EPs disc version) is different, and one was done very recently because the original version had been lost. I'm sure he said that in the P4K interview he did last year.
― they all are afflicted with a sickness of existence (Scik Mouthy), Thursday, February 7, 2013 2:14 AM (6 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink
That was me, that's cool, I'd love to hear it, a little upset the cd was never given proper release in the u.s., I'd really like to hear it on cd, so pricy to import :-(
― downton arby (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, 7 February 2013 14:36 (thirteen years ago)
6 hours and no new updates?
is everything ok??
anyway, the more i listen to mbv, the more i prefer it to Loveless. the main reason i think is that the production seems fuller and more compressed. it's not loud chorus/quiet verse (Only Shallow for example), but loud chorus AND verse. also, the melodies are great, and the vocals are a bit clearer which is also great.
In Another Way sounds like a Faith Healers.
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:45 (thirteen years ago)
I am toying with the idea of thinking this too (that I like it better). Quite hard to figure out though. I actually don't get the stuff about the new one being 'more straightforward' and 'less vague' etc. Loveless has a lot of stuff on it that to me, sounds like guitars being strummed.
― Keith, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:47 (thirteen years ago)
I am loving this album but at this point there isn't one single song that I would say is better than "Only Shallow", which I consider to be the platonic ideal of a My Bloody Valentine song (and is the only one besides "Soon" that I've actively listened to in the past decade)
ask me in a month how I feel about "Only Tomorrow", though
― Ima R.A.E.D. (DJP), Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:48 (thirteen years ago)
but Loveless is the more straightforward one!xpost
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:49 (thirteen years ago)
Funny that - lot's of people have said that too. I never much rated Only Shallow. In fact, I just put Loveless on after I posted there and skipped to Loomer (which I think is the best track on it, along with To Here Knows When). And all the other tracks.
― Keith, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:50 (thirteen years ago)
Nostormo, yes that's what I think... Just that it doesn't appear to be a widely held opinion (as far as I read anyway).
otmxpost
Only Shallow is MBV for the masses (read: accessible): very melodic, use the quiet/loud 90's formula etc..there are better songs in Loveless (Soon, Loomer..)
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:53 (thirteen years ago)
only shallow will always be one of my faves
― pfunkboy (Algerian Goalkeeper), Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:55 (thirteen years ago)
After a few days now, I am actually still struggling to come to terms with the fact that "mbv" is really great.
― Keith, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:55 (thirteen years ago)
I only knew "Soon" for the longest time, and then I bought the album on a whim during the summer of '98 while driving around DC and when I popped the CD into the car stereo "Only Shadow" blew my face off and I have been entirely beholden to it ever since
I also think that people who think mbv is more straightforward than Loveless are not actually listening to the music, but rather the end result of production techniques they've been soaking in for 22 years. Musically, mbv is a good bit more complicated.
"Soon" is way more "MBV for the masses" than anything else on the album btw
― Ima R.A.E.D. (DJP), Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:56 (thirteen years ago)
my platonic ideal melodic MBV song is What You Wantmy platonic ideal noise MBV song is Feed Me With Your Kissmy platonic ideal melodically noisy MBV song is (When You Wake) You're Still in a Dream
― Z S, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:57 (thirteen years ago)
mbv is also more focused
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:58 (thirteen years ago)
still not into the sequencing of this one. feels very lumpy to me, like when you're making a duvet and you shove it inside the cover and somehow all the bulk ends up being all squished up at one end. favourite track is actually the first song, i think people are passing over it cos it's seemingly a bit slight as an opener, but really it's gorgeous.
― Jaap and roids (NickB), Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:58 (thirteen years ago)
See, Dan - to my ears, it sounds more complicated production-wise too. In that it sounds vaguer and less like guitars. Other people have said it sounds much closer to a live band. My ears say WAHT.
It actually makes me wonder if what Kevin Shields has been working of for the past 22 years is to make a record that actually sounds completely different to everyone who listens to it.
― Keith, Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:58 (thirteen years ago)
Loveless is obv more straightforward because every song is verse-instrumental-verse
― ron paulstretch (crüt), Thursday, 7 February 2013 20:59 (thirteen years ago)
"favourite track is actually the first song, i think people are passing over it cos it's seemingly a bit slight "
its a great song
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:00 (thirteen years ago)
yeah the instrumental is the chorus xpost
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:01 (thirteen years ago)
First song is amazing. Way better than Sometimes, which it's getting compared with.
― Keith, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:02 (thirteen years ago)
I wouldn't go that far, but it is great. I do wish it was sequenced closer to the middle or end, though.
― Z S, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:05 (thirteen years ago)
i never thought i could think a new shoegaze record is so great, even if it's by MBV, which says something.
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:06 (thirteen years ago)
yeah i think the slow 'uns on m b v compare very well with loveless, the melodies and textures are delicious. the louders ones are all individually good but never really glue together.
― cw, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:08 (thirteen years ago)
I like it better than "Loveless!"
But I also like "Isn't Anything" better than Loveless.
I don't think I like it better than "Say Anything" though.
― Loud guitars shit all over "Bette Davis Eyes" (NYCNative), Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:10 (thirteen years ago)
(Which isn't to say I dislike "Loveless" even a little bit.)
(Yes, I know this is sacrilege.)
― Loud guitars shit all over "Bette Davis Eyes" (NYCNative), Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:11 (thirteen years ago)
I like it all and you must obey me.
― Ned Raggett, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:11 (thirteen years ago)
you got lesslove for loveless
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:11 (thirteen years ago)
I like it all. And did before Ned's decree.Though the decree was reassuring that I was doing SOMETHING right.
― Loud guitars shit all over "Bette Davis Eyes" (NYCNative), Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:13 (thirteen years ago)
I do too!
― the little prince of inane false binary hype (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:13 (thirteen years ago)
I tried thinking that the other day, and it might be the case, but I had to hold myself back with the fact that the new one is well, 22 years newer. It might just be that, but it's certainly in the ball park.
― Keith, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:16 (thirteen years ago)
the 1st song is great but it is also a perfect opener, somehow it doesn't really kick off, it is a ballad. the second thing on the other hand goes into the heart of things. after 90 secs it mutates into a monster. a monster of distortion. they have never worked with this kind of distortion if i remember correctly. it is like the dissolution of the vagueness. totally opposite to the hoover sound of loveless, thousands of discrete noisy bits under tension exploding into all directions. whereas the hoover sound has that uniform, harmonic quality. actually the third song has the hoover sound written all over it. this album is definitely more varied than loveless. i don't think one album is better than the other, they are both geat but mbv seems to be a nut which is harder to crack than loveless. if loveless was a walnut than mbv is a brazil nut.
― it's the distortion, stupid! (alex in mainhattan), Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:17 (thirteen years ago)
the second song, not thing
― it's the distortion, stupid! (alex in mainhattan), Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:18 (thirteen years ago)
thousands of discrete noisy bits under tension exploding into all directions.
Loveless has quite a lot of that. Variety can sometimes stray towards incoherence too.
Been listening to anything but this album.
― xyzzzz__, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:21 (thirteen years ago)
i think i like it more than loveless but loveless doesn't have anything as crappy as 'new you' (don't defend it, u know deep down its terrible)
― ☏ (am0n), Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:21 (thirteen years ago)
or Nothing Is which is boring
― nostormo, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:23 (thirteen years ago)
The first song feels more like it should be the second, I dunno why, it just doesn't feel like an album opener, but I love it when the guitar starts to rise in the second half. Whereas Only Shallow is such a monstrous opener.
The chord changes in If I Am are gorgeous, that's becoming my favourite.
― Matt DC, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:23 (thirteen years ago)
That's actually why I like it, Matt... The last album has a monstrous opener, and this one has a chill out opening. I mean it needed something to calm the nerves.
― Keith, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:24 (thirteen years ago)
btw, did anyone else who ordered the album get a weird email today apologizing for some kind of charging error?
Our sincere apologies for the payment issues you have experienced while using our online store.Due to a problem with our payment provider which has now been resolved, a small percentage of users were unfortunately having money docked in their account despite our system finding an error and being unable to complete the purchase.
Due to a problem with our payment provider which has now been resolved, a small percentage of users were unfortunately having money docked in their account despite our system finding an error and being unable to complete the purchase.
― Z S, Thursday, 7 February 2013 21:25 (thirteen years ago)