It's an iconic band decides to release a bland mediocre album sullying their legacy episode

>it's an iconic band decides to release a bland mediocre album sullying their legacy episode

Just because it's not Loveless doesn't mean it's bland or mediocre. It's the Twin Peaks: The Return of music.

It's uninspired wank to pander to fanboys like you

You're gonna have to do better than that.

It's great. It's just different.

But Twin Peaks the Return is even better than the original serie
While being a good album mbv is nowhere near as good as loveless

Great argument

I'm 5 episodes into The Return and I'm having a hard time keeping up. Does it get better?

Yes, but at that point I was loving it already though. At least keep until Episode 8 (it's real worth it).

Pretty great album actually if you're not a faggot who likes Loveless because it's "le memetastic shoegaze album."

It's much like an amalgamation of all their different sounds combined into one album.

I enjoy it just as much as Loveless.

This so much. People always compare them when in reality they’re different beasts

this. episode 8 is brilliant.

sort of like what swans did.

you retards are lapping up that shit though.

Good post.

It's basically a collage of uninspired faux sounds that's expected of shoegaze, if anything this was their meme album
Loveless was an experimental album that defined an entire genre

Wrong. It was a worthy successor.

go away, mbv is a great album

If I Am and Who Sees You are better than loveless

I thought it was a suitable follow-up to Loveless considering the band's discography as a whole. MBV is a band of incremental progression that led up to a genre-defining work rather than a band who has made nothing but genre-defining works. mbv makes sense as a follow-up to Loveless in that sense, people forget that it took Shields like a decade of fucking about to finally end up with that sound.

If you seriously expected Kevin to keep making artistic innovations in the way that he was then you're a big baby. Creative people usually reach a point where honing the intricacies of what you do is a better way to focus your efforts than trailblazing for the sake of trailblazing. The time the band spent on it is apparent if you give it more than a cursory listen.

Only Tomorrow is one of their best songs

>honing the intricacies
It's just a rehash with a slighty different sound. It's a pointless album.
>you're a big baby
Pot, meet kettle

"Pointless" is a little strong. The use of textures is somewhat similar but the song structures aren't comparable - Loveless doesn't have any of the drawn-out chord patterns and passages that don't go together linearly. Colm shows off his drumming on more tracks. You can't seriously believe that it was an attempt to rehash Loveless if you've read anything about how it was made.

Diet loveliescrushing.

...

>It's a band decides not to call it quits with a perfect, albeit small, discography, and spends 12 years sullying their reputation for releasing anything worthwhile episode

this

pretty shit taste there user
you too

Not the other guy, but: While not an attempt to rehash Loveless, it was clear that it was a hasty, half-arsed compilation of tracks that the dude had lying around that he released when the crying fans demanding a continuation to the project became too loud to bare. The album doesn't sound like a cohesive whole at all, the ideas are simultaneously all over the place and nowhere to be seen, whatever "new" element the album brings to the MBV palette sounds dated and a lesser example of things that had been done before (sure, they were made by people often influenced by Loveless, but they came up with it nevertheless) because Kevin sat on his arse for so long that he let all his ideas go to waste and other people stole the opportunity from him.

It's like a collection of old b-sides/retrospective that they released because they didn't want their new tours to go without merch to sell at them.

Most that album's songs were written through the 90s. It's no Loveless, and it isn't all that groundbreaking, but it's solid. Far better than that Slowdive comeback record. It actually feels like the band was continuing with new artistic ideas rather than just saying "hey, we're still alive!".

Only the first three, and more like "around 1997"

>Only the first three
Not true. Gotta read all the new articles and interviews, as well as some slightly older ones. At least half of them at least were thought up in the 90s. New You was written in 94. But yeah, it seems that most were written in the mid-late 90s. Not that it matters.

Matt Elliot and Kevin Shields collab when

I own the album and have read the liner notes. That one's the only song written pre-1997

This hurts, but it's fair