Van Halen Verdict

gHost Spartan wrote: Rock is dead and no one idolizes guitar players anymore. So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

gHost Spartan wrote:So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

gHost Spartan wrote:Van Halen sucked. VH1 was a solid debut album but what followed was absolute garbage; VH could not write great songs and most of their hits were covers excluding "1984" which I think was their best album, with VH1 a close second and the rest you can just toss in the dumpster. Their evolution from rockers to arena rock/pop was absolutely embarrassing and, looking back, I'm actually shocked that they remained as popular as they were. Sammy Hagar was not as good of a frontman as David Lee Roth but in the end I don't think it really mattered that much because Eddie was writing all of those stupid love songs so the frontman was irrelevant. Overall, VH was a very good rock band with shitty songwriting that managed to stay relevant for about a decade. That's really about it. Eddie will always be considered one of the best and, really, does it matter anymore? Rock is dead and no one idolizes guitar players anymore. So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

LooseGoose wrote:

gHost Spartan wrote: Rock is dead and no one idolizes guitar players anymore. So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

Bullshit. It starts and ends with Michael Schenker. Neither of those two could hold his jock.

Cameron wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Bullshit. It starts and ends with Michael Schenker. Neither of those two could hold his jock.

LooseGoose wrote:

Cameron wrote:

Dead serious.

gHost Spartan wrote:Listen to "Runnin' with the Devil" and "Why Can't This Be Love" and you've answered your own question. Two completely different bands.

gHost Spartan wrote:Van Halen sucked. VH1 was a solid debut album but what followed was absolute garbage; VH could not write great songs and most of their hits were covers excluding "1984" which I think was their best album, with VH1 a close second and the rest you can just toss in the dumpster. Their evolution from rockers to arena rock/pop was absolutely embarrassing and, looking back, I'm actually shocked that they remained as popular as they were. Sammy Hagar was not as good of a frontman as David Lee Roth but in the end I don't think it really mattered that much because Eddie was writing all of those stupid love songs so the frontman was irrelevant. Overall, VH was a very good rock band with shitty songwriting that managed to stay relevant for about a decade. That's really about it. Eddie will always be considered one of the best and, really, does it matter anymore? Rock is dead and no one idolizes guitar players anymore. So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

kingstonlake wrote:When kid rock was asked that question with Sammy Hagar in the room he said, "Man, DLR wrote runnin with the devil, you gotta bow down to that".

Robert J Sakimano wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:When kid rock was asked that question with Sammy Hagar in the room he said, "Man, DLR wrote runnin with the devil, you gotta bow down to that".

now there is someone whose taste in music is nothing short of admirable. His opinion carries incredible weight.

gHost Spartan wrote:Van Halen sucked. VH1 was a solid debut album but what followed was absolute garbage; VH could not write great songs and most of their hits were covers excluding "1984" which I think was their best album, with VH1 a close second and the rest you can just toss in the dumpster. Their evolution from rockers to arena rock/pop was absolutely embarrassing and, looking back, I'm actually shocked that they remained as popular as they were. Sammy Hagar was not as good of a frontman as David Lee Roth but in the end I don't think it really mattered that much because Eddie was writing all of those stupid love songs so the frontman was irrelevant. Overall, VH was a very good rock band with shitty songwriting that managed to stay relevant for about a decade. That's really about it. Eddie will always be considered one of the best and, really, does it matter anymore? Rock is dead and no one idolizes guitar players anymore. So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

SeeRockCity wrote:

gHost Spartan wrote:Van Halen sucked. VH1 was a solid debut album but what followed was absolute garbage; VH could not write great songs and most of their hits were covers excluding "1984" which I think was their best album, with VH1 a close second and the rest you can just toss in the dumpster. Their evolution from rockers to arena rock/pop was absolutely embarrassing and, looking back, I'm actually shocked that they remained as popular as they were. Sammy Hagar was not as good of a frontman as David Lee Roth but in the end I don't think it really mattered that much because Eddie was writing all of those stupid love songs so the frontman was irrelevant. Overall, VH was a very good rock band with shitty songwriting that managed to stay relevant for about a decade. That's really about it. Eddie will always be considered one of the best and, really, does it matter anymore? Rock is dead and no one idolizes guitar players anymore. So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

This is spot on. Van Halen, after the first album and with a few random exceptions, took the Phil Collins route to stardom.

SeeRockCity wrote:

gHost Spartan wrote:Van Halen sucked. VH1 was a solid debut album but what followed was absolute garbage; VH could not write great songs and most of their hits were covers excluding "1984" which I think was their best album, with VH1 a close second and the rest you can just toss in the dumpster. Their evolution from rockers to arena rock/pop was absolutely embarrassing and, looking back, I'm actually shocked that they remained as popular as they were. Sammy Hagar was not as good of a frontman as David Lee Roth but in the end I don't think it really mattered that much because Eddie was writing all of those stupid love songs so the frontman was irrelevant. Overall, VH was a very good rock band with shitty songwriting that managed to stay relevant for about a decade. That's really about it. Eddie will always be considered one of the best and, really, does it matter anymore? Rock is dead and no one idolizes guitar players anymore. So really the argument is Hendrix or Eddie.

This is spot on. Van Halen, after the first album and with a few random exceptions, took the Phil Collins route to stardom.

SawGreen wrote:

gHost Spartan wrote:Listen to "Runnin' with the Devil" and "Why Can't This Be Love" and you've answered your own question. Two completely different bands.

That change occurred before Sammy (pretty much at the time Eddie added keyboards). Sadly a lot of bands lost their edge the more mainstream they became.

Snake Plissken wrote:

SawGreen wrote:

That change occurred before Sammy (pretty much at the time Eddie added keyboards). Sadly a lot of bands lost their edge the more mainstream they became.

The 80's are full of bands that sold out. Def Leppard is a great example. On Through The Night was good...raw but good. High 'N Dry was unfuckingbelieveable. Pyromania was a very good album and made a crap ton of money but was nowhere near the album High 'N Dry was. Hysteria was a sell out and every album after that had 1 popish song that sold a ton of records.

Motley Crue is the same. Too Fast for Love was a very good album. Shout at the Devil is top 10 in my book. Unreal... then they wanted to cash in and made Theatre of Pain and Girls, Girls, Girls. Not bad albums but clearly the focus was on selling records and not making music that was respected.

Van Halen is the same although they changed singers. I've seen the original VH live, Van Hager, Van Halen with Wolfie and DLR and Sammy with Michael Anthony. I enjoyed the Sammy concert more than any of the others. Sammy just wants to play music. He's invested well and has more money than he needs. He just likes playing. Eddie is an egotistical ass that plays well but has too many issues to overlook. While I like the old VH music better the band was very commercial and made a ton of $$$ with Sammy behind the mike.

gHost Spartan wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:For me their music stands the test of time 100%. Don't know shit about guitars but I loved EV guitar sound. That throaty sound it had on songs like beautiful girls, Unchained, etc. That era could tend to favor some pretty light weight shit rock and roll wise. VH had some junk towards the end, agreed. Saw them live in 1980 at Cobo. Fucking awesome and pure rock and roll. Not this political shit you see today. Not social conscious BS. Rock and roll and fun. To me that's a pure form of RR to appreciate.

Political shit from today? WTF are you talking about? There's barely any rock bands anymore! Do you not realize that some of the greatest rock of all time was politically inspired during the 60s and 70s?

SawGreen wrote:

gHost Spartan wrote:

Political shit from today? WTF are you talking about? There's barely any rock bands anymore! Do you not realize that some of the greatest rock of all time was politically inspired during the 60s and 70s?

I think I've finally come around that rock is pretty much dead. I'm now the equivalent of my parents listening to Lawrence Welk (just a bit louder).

gHost Spartan wrote:

kingstonlake wrote:For me their music stands the test of time 100%. Don't know shit about guitars but I loved EV guitar sound. That throaty sound it had on songs like beautiful girls, Unchained, etc. That era could tend to favor some pretty light weight shit rock and roll wise. VH had some junk towards the end, agreed. Saw them live in 1980 at Cobo. Fucking awesome and pure rock and roll. Not this political shit you see today. Not social conscious BS. Rock and roll and fun. To me that's a pure form of RR to appreciate.

Political shit from today? WTF are you talking about? There's barely any rock bands anymore! Do you not realize that some of the greatest rock of all time was politically inspired during the 60s and 70s?