My Bloody Valentine Album: “Loveless”

Where does one begin when it comes to describing this landmark album? Let's start with the general aesthetic. Imagine an album full of variations upon "Tomorrow Never Knows" via Sonic Youth and you might get an idea of what My Bloody Valentine is all about. Add some post-coital, halcyon-dazed vocals to the mix, warp the guitar sound with a healthy dose of gamma radiation and you've got yerself the best guitar album since Television's "Marquee Moon" hit in the mid-'70s. "Loveless" is one of those rare albums that managed to transcend its influences. In 1991, it was a distinct and compelling force within the incredibly stale medium of guitar rock. Guess what? It's still just as jaw-droppingly good twelve years down the road.

Now, some of you might be convinced that an album that has garnered God knows how many "*****" reviews must be the most amazing thing ever committed to tape. Well...hold on a sec. Yes, this is an incredible, peerless work by a truly gifted set of musicians, but it ain't fer everybody. If you go in to this record "unprepared", then it will undoubtedly leave you cold with the distinct aftertaste of hype lingering in your ears. So, with that in mind, here's a list of things you should know before you drop some hard-earned coin on the vaunted "Loveless":

-Musos beware! This band doesn't "do" ornate, baroque, "theory-happy", guitar-technique rock. You won't find any "fretboard fireworks", constantly shifting time signatures, "bitchin' licks" or any other "musical feats of athleticism" on this album. If you don't think that music can be impressive or innovative without any prog-rock/virtuoso wanking, then this ain't the album for you.

-If you don't "get it", then don't worry about it. This album isn't for everyone. It helps to approach this record with some knowledge of MBV's forebears and contemporaries. Listen to some Sonic Youth, the Jesus and Mary Chain, and Brian Eno (especially "Pussyfooting" with Robert Fripp). Being familiar with the first three Ramones albums wouldn't hurt either, considering that they are one of Kevin's big influences. Don't believe me? Listen to "Judy Is a Punk" and hum a MBV-ish "swooning" melody during the bridge. Bingo!

-Disregard any and all comparisons made between MBV and the Cocteau Twins. Similar aesthetic, radically different approach. The Cocteaus were filigree and lace, snowfall and sunlight, pretty, delicate, elegant and feminine. MBV was more like an erotic, androgynous blizzard of pink noise.

-Disregard any mention of My Bloody Valentine as an influence on crap like the Smashing Pumpkins. Layering 378 guitars isn't what MBV was all about. "Siamese Dream" may have been "inspired" by MBV, but it sounded like a pseudo-goth version of Boston in the end.

-Some folks claim that there are no "songs" on this album. Huh? "Only Shallow" is driven by an oceanic, Sabbath-esque riff that then melts into a beautiful pop melody in the verses. "When You Sleep" is a vast, goosebump-inducing slice of heaven that still manages to be a snappy little pop song. "Blown a Wish" melds sheer ambient loveliness with a beautiful melody and ends up sounding like Serge Gainsbourg circa 2400 AD. This is an extremely tuneful album. Anybody that doesn't think that there are any "songs" on this record needs to get their head examined.

-People often claim that LOVELESS sounds "flat" or "murky" and that the production on this record doesn't warrant the $500,000 price tag. Listen to this album with a pair of good headphones (the kind that don't say "Memorex" on the side) and prepare to find out where that half-mil of Alan McGee's cash went. If you want to hear really awful production values, then listen to "Isn't Anything" sometime. Hey, I've been a rabid MBV fan for over a decade and I still can't stand that album. The songs are fantastic, but the production is terrible. Yeech...

-Common complaint # 453: "You can't hear the vocals." MBV approached the vocals as another instrument, another layer of color. If you think that the vocals should have been mixed "high", then you're missing the point of the band's "symphonic" approach to making music. The vocals exist on the same aural level as the guitars and the bass so that each instrument would blend and harmonize to create new textures. Shields experimented with loops, tremolo, dissonance, harmony and the actual sound waves produced by the amplifiers to produce "ghosts" of melody that could only be heard when the amps were positioned just so and everything was mixed evenly. These "melodies" that were the result of the interference patterns produced by the instruments weren't composed, but they weren't accidental either. "To Here Knows When" and "Soon" are the best examples of this approach.

Enjoy!...

Buyers beware. Although I think MBV's Loveless is a perfect album in every way, I bought this version because it was specified as a REMASTERED version, which it is most definitely NOT. I listened to my old copy of Loveless on CD and I listened to this newer supposedly remastered copy back to back. There is no difference except for the price tag. Unless you want to pay 30 bucks for a second copy of Loveless with no bonus tracks and one that isn't remasterd I'd suggest you stay away. The only difference here is that there is an extra booklet, but it is entirely in Korean and there is a slipcover for the CD jewelcase. As a huge My Bloody Valentine fan, I was completely disappointed that I wasted my money purchasing another copy of the record with nothing of extra value. I'd give an arm and a leg for a real remastered copy of Loveless. This isn't it.

Moved by challenging music, I bought Loveless based on high critical accolades, as a "classic album" of the 90's. I placed it in my CD, hit play, and got whacked upside the cranium with my first-ever full volume dose of MBV bad craziness. Confused, it angered me; all this seemingly intelligent, melodious pop blocked by Kevin Shield's ominous wall of distortion. Scratching my sore head as to what compelled me to buy the CD, I put it away. But something about MBV and Loveless hooked me enough on my first disgust-laden listen. After a month or so, I pulled it out, mind open, equalizer ready, and gave it a careful second listen. Then a third, fourth, and fifth; with each successive listening, I further comprehended and grooved with all the pop and vocal and harmonic and discordant nuances--until I get hooked on the sixth. And it's the artistic masterpiece the other reviewers have opined.

For me, 6 listens is a new record. And it's well worth the effort. Loveless is unlike anything else musically out there, ever. For this reason alone,if you're a MBV newbie--like I was--give it a few chances. Then groove on....

If music is the external record of the evolution of the human consciousness to a point in time where all sound, even the white noise that is the universal frequency of interstellar energies, is heard with wonder and as manifesting beauty because it is one with our experiential perception of god, then My Bloody Valentine's "Loveless" is nothing less than a landmark record in that evolution.

Language is usually a poor tool to communicate the experience of sound, and it is rendered useless when presented with a document like this. If I were to try I might suggest words like "beautiful", "oceanic", "sensuous", "sensual", "ecstatic", "dreamlike", "orgasmic", "breathtaking", "emotive", "transcendent", "psychedelic", "mesmerizing", "elephantine", "lullaby", "ethereal", "soothing", "mellifluous" and "euphoric", but I would simply sound like an Amazon reviewer whose specialty is hyperbole as opposed to subjective critique. Make no mistake, however...this album is nothing short of extraordinary in every way. The fact that so little has come close to its power and grace since its release in 1991 is either testament to the vision of its creators, or proof that human beings are able to successfully channel the mysteries into an audio recording.

I feel this album is also an excellent example of the kind of textural tone colors that can be realized through the creative use of a guitar and digital sampler. The stereo mix might be described as "distorted", "out of tune", or "unbalanced" to the casual listener, and indeed, the recording is ripe with the sounds of machines being used in ways for which they were not designed. By the same measure, Les Paul was criticized for electrifying the guitar. "Loveless" is a wonderful album for the musician, as it will challenge, confound, and leap over your preconceptions of what music and sound should be.

It has been said that an essential quality of good art is its ability to leave each who witnesses it changed, and the fact that everyone who hears this album either swoons or recoils is proof that this is art with a capital "A".

I give "Loveless" my absolute and highest recommendation. No degree or amount of accolades do it justice, and my life is richer for having heard it. What more can I say?

i still have issues with this album, and it's really too much to listen to more than a couple times a week. but i discovered one night that to really appreciate this album, you have to let go. it's like looking at one of those "magic eye" pictures. if you try to focus on the music, there's nothing there. listen to this album on headphones in complete darkness...right before you go to sleep, or whenever you're feeling extremely tired and your brain is fuzzy. the reward for being able to let go, is a sudden control like i haven't had with any other music. i feel like i am nearly hallucinating while listening. the best way to describe the feeling is being inside a three-dimensional impressionist painting (a very abstract Monet) that you are climbing around in. it's warm and humid, but not too much so. and it's constantly changing. and there's so much to the music that you feel like you have control over what you're seeing.

good luck...