PDA

View Full Version : Thanks Dave



lance watts
05.04.02, 02:35 AM
Sure Dave is crazier than a Indian on Aquanet but there's no denying that he's got a realistic handle on what the fans want. Pure, 100%, uncut Van Halen. I'll suffer through live versions of Three Lock Box and I Can't Drive 55 anyday - as long as I get to hear DLR belt out the original songs that made VH a legendary band.

Look for me at the Gorge. I'll be the boozed-up nincompoop with the "Who the fuck is Sammy?" t-shirt.

Elwood P.
05.04.02, 02:41 AM
Though he has alot of solo stuff his fans would like to hear, if he doesn't do the classic VH stuff, we may never get to hear it again. Unless you see the Atomic Punks.

Don Kirschner Fan
05.04.02, 05:11 AM
At the rate Dave & Sam have been on the road the last several years (years minus VH), it's similar to the old days - and it's for the fans graemlins/thumb.gif .

Thanks Dave, thanks Sam !

Glenn
05.04.02, 10:15 AM
It never ceases to amaze me that there's so many people that are willing to accept one quarter of the original Van Halen doing these songs, because it's so important to hear them in a live setting. And yet there's so many people who just refused to accept it when three quarters of Van Halen did the same thing.

Moving this thread to the Sam/Dave tour forum. smile.gif

Mario VH
05.04.02, 10:23 AM
Great point Glenn. Couldn't have said it any better.

The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug
05.04.02, 04:51 PM
Three-quarters doing a bit o' classic, a bit o' second-gen, and VHIII.

Versus one quarter doin' 100 percent classic, a quarter who happens to pull much more than his share of the band's live presence, with a voice that belongs on the tunes he's singing. And if Mr. Fingers is missing, there's someone in his place so faithful and carefully studied that he might trick you from time to time if you close your eyes - something that would NEVER happen with any other vocalist.

We ain't talking studio virtuosity, and we ain't talking string-geek technique worship. We're talking the live show. The high-jinks, stage presence, and PERSONALITY that made the band famous.

And I'd be willing to bet that three-quarters of the band are probably missing a great deal more than that one quarter is, in this context.

Wolfman
05.04.02, 05:43 PM
Originally posted by Glenn:
It never ceases to amaze me that there's so many people that are willing to accept one quarter of the original Van Halen doing these songs, because it's so important to hear them in a live setting. And yet there's so many people who just refused to accept it when three quarters of Van Halen did the same thing.
Agreed. graemlins/thumb.gif

So many people bitched during the Sammy years that the first six albums were ignored live, and then once Ed brought the tunes back out in the show, evrybody was too obsessed with whether or not Gary was gay to be appreciative. :rolleyes:

Van Halen fans bitch. A lot. Very well. LOL

Glenn
05.04.02, 06:54 PM
Bottom line, EVH's voice is as imprinted on those songs as Dave's is. It's a musical voice, but it's a voice just the same. I don't think there's anything wrong with having preferences, or acknowledging that when dealing with those compositions, EVH and DLR are the ultimate matchup, but it's awfully hypocritical to say that you won't accept anyone but DLR SINGING Panama, but you'll accept Steve Vai, Brian Young, or any of the many guitar players in between PLAYING Panama!

I also think it's funny how away from Dave, Eddie has to produce something that rivals Fair Warning or it's dismissed as a waste of time. And yet away from Eddie, Dave can produce work that is far below the Fair Warning standard and it's accepted that at least Dave is trying.

Lou
05.04.02, 07:10 PM
Originally posted by Glenn:
It never ceases to amaze me that there's so many people that are willing to accept one quarter of the original Van Halen doing these songs, because it's so important to hear them in a live setting. And yet there's so many people who just refused to accept it when three quarters of Van Halen did the same thing.

Moving this thread to the Sam/Dave tour forum. smile.gif I know that this is essentially the Sammy Hagar board so no one will get this, but it's all about the attitude. Dave brings the Van HALEN attitude. Ed, Alex, and Mike with Spam or Cherboney don't bring that attitude. Also, you can imitate the guitar fairly well, but you can't imitate the human voice. Ed's voice isn't 1/1000th as important as Dave's.

As far as your Fair Warning comment, that's bogus too because again, it's about a spirit and an attitude. That attitude is still on the DLR solo albums. DLR's albums are not anywhere near Van Halen quality. But they're superior to Van Hagar, which was sellout garbage with shitty lyrics. Dave wouldn't have allowed Backside Boys crap like Love Walks In.

In short, the singer is the attitude and the identity of the band. That's the way it works in rock. No matter how great the guitarist is, the singer is what you think of when you think of the band. It's not like replacing a bassist or a drummer who generally (but not always of course) contribute little to the band. Van HALEN was Ed and Dave, plain and simple. Dave brought the flash and attitude that complemented and enhanced the music. When Dave left, the music suffered and the attitude was pretty lame.

Glenn
05.04.02, 07:24 PM
Originally posted by Lou:
I know that this is essentially the Sammy Hagar board so no one will get this, but it's all about the attitude.Nope, you're 100% wrong. The majority of the people on this board prefer Roth era VH, I am one of them. Believe me, I 'get it', but that doesn't mean I can sit here and suggest that DLR is the be all and the end all.


Ed's voice isn't 1/1000th as important as Dave's.Am I reading this wrong? Are you saying that Dave's voice (what he brought vocally to the table) is 1000 times more important to the Van Halen sound than Ed's voice (the guitar playing)? If so, that's a laughable statement! If Dave was THAT superior, his solo output would have been as good as his VH output. It wasn't; he declined without Eddie just as Eddie declined without him.


Dave wouldn't have allowed Backside Boys crap like Love Walks In.No, he'd just allow crap like Stand Up or Cheatin Heart Cafe! :D And Lou, I know that you're hating these songs that DLR has been putting out as of late, so let's remember that DLR is quite capable of finding the bottom of the barrel on his own.


In short, the singer is the attitude and the identity of the band. That's the way it works in rock. No matter how great the guitarist is, the singer is what you think of when you think of the band.Have you ever heard the phrase "beauty is only skin deep"? Ask anyone who is (and almost ALWAYS was) the engine of the Rolling Stones, and they'll tell you it was Keith Richards. Same with Van Halen in my opinion, the songs began with Eddie. I would never discount Dave's importance, but the whole thing began with Eddie. Name me a song that Dave brought into the band. There's nothing to sing or write melodies to without EVH. I don't necessarily disagree with your assessment that the singer is the focal point, but it's shortsighted to suggest that that tells the tale of what is going on beneath the surface.

FORD
05.04.02, 09:08 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Glenn:

Have you ever heard the phrase "beauty is only skin deep"? Ask anyone who is (and almost ALWAYS was) the engine of the Rolling Stones, and they'll tell you it was Keith Richards.

To some extent that's true, but with the Stones, it has always been more complicated than that. There is no ONE person in the Stones who is the engine. Keith is extremely vital, yet "Sway" and "Moonlight Mile" are 2 of the best songs on Sticky Fingers, and Keith doesn't play a chord on either one.

Mick is essential to the band, but that doesn't keep "Happy", "Before They Make Me Run", or "You Got The Silver" from being some of the band's best work.

Charlie Watts is literally the backbone of the band's sound, yet some of the band's biggest hits in the "golden era" with Mick Taylor actually featured producer Jimmy Miller on drums.

It's not one of these guys who IS the Rolling Stones, it's the three of them. And the chemistry between those three, which will allow a classic Stones song, even if one of them is missing. And let's face it, if the chemistry wasn't there, that fucking band wouldn't be celebrating 40 years in the business.

Same with Van Halen in my opinion, the songs began with Eddie. I would never discount Dave's importance, but the whole thing began with Eddie. Name me a song that Dave brought into the band. There's nothing to sing or write melodies to without EVH.

And VDIII proved (as did that Donut City crap) that Eddie can write riffs and solos like few others, but he can't turn them into songs to save his fucking life without either Dave or Sammy. Again, it's about the Chemistry. Van HALEN and Van Hagar were both about chemistry, but the Van HALEN chemistry just happenned to work better.

Why? because chemistry isn't about lovey dovey "brother-soulmate" bullshit. The Stones aren't exactly best friends. Neither are the Who. All of these bands, even Van Hagar (with Humans Being) did some of their best work when they were pissed off at each other. And that is chemistry...

Dave can't recreate the chemistry he had with Eddie, but at least he can bring the attitude. And since Eddie won't bring himself, Brian Young will have to bring him. In any event, it will sound much closer to Van HALEN than VDIII did. For as good as Eddie played on that tour, the vocals were just wrong. Cherone might have tried. He probably tried to sing the songs, where as Sammy's complete disinterest in the material was always obvious. But it didn't work. Any more than me trying to sing Johnny Cash. You just can't duplicate a voice like that.

Glenn
05.04.02, 09:36 PM
Originally posted by FORD:
To some extent that's true, but with the Stones, it has always been more complicated than that. There is no ONE person in the Stones who is the engine.One of my favorite Stones stories; I believe it was Allen Klein, when he first walked into the studio to meet the band, the only thing he wanted to know was "who makes the records", and everyone pointed to Keith. He was the engine. Of course the rest of the guys were vital, but Keith was universally known as the guy.


Dave can't recreate the chemistry he had with Eddie, but at least he can bring the attitude.That's exactly the attitude I was referring to earlier. Why does Dave have the right to replace Eddie and get a free pass while you expect Eddie to either get Dave or die?


You just can't duplicate a voice like that.And you can't duplicate a guitar genius like Eddie Van Halen. I'm no guitar expert, I can barely play a power chord, but simple hearing tells me when I'm hearing Eddie Van Halen and when I'm hearing someone play Eddie Van Halen.

I would love to see Eddie get Ralph Saenz into the band just to watch the people complain; the same people who have no problem with Dave employing Eddie clones. ;)

If the engine of Van Halen is Dave and Eddie, then Steve Vai, Bart Walsh and Brian Young have no more business playing EVH's riffs than Sammy Hagar and Gary Cherone had of singing Dave's words.

Legoman
05.05.02, 06:55 AM
In short, the singer is the attitude and the identity of the band. That's the way it works in rock. No matter how great the guitarist is, the singer is what you think of when you think of the band. As well as the Stones, what about Led Zep or, to a lesser extent, Deep Purple. No-one can deny the importance, visual as well as musical, of Jimmy Page and Richie Blackmore.
As for Van Halen though, I'd rather watch Van Halen as a three piece but with Eddie, than DLR with his karaoke backing band doing classic VH numbers. To give Dave more prominence than Eddie in classic VH is nonsense.

[ May 05, 2002 at 07:56 AM: Message edited by: Legoman ]</p>

Lou
05.05.02, 11:58 AM
I thought you literally meant Ed's backup voice. I read that wrong.

Van HALEN was 48% Dave, 48% Ed, 2% Mike, 2% Alex.

DLR'sCock
05.05.02, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by lance watts:
Sure Dave is crazier than a Indian on Aquanet but there's no denying that he's got a realistic handle on what the fans want. Pure, 100%, uncut Van Halen. I'll suffer through live versions of Three Lock Box and I Can't Drive 55 anyday - as long as I get to hear DLR belt out the original songs that made VH a legendary band.

Look for me at the Gorge. I'll be the boozed-up nincompoop with the "Who the fuck is Sammy?" t-shirt.Agreed!!! Thanks Dave!!!!

PLEASE COME OUT EAST!!!!

The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug
05.05.02, 04:09 PM
Seems like there's a whole lot of effort being wasted in a vain attempt to manufacture inconsistency in people's viewpoints, here.

Because as far as Eddie's "musical voice" goes - well, it would be insane to dispute how distinctive that voice is. But people who have dedicated their lives to imitiating EVH can sound just like him. Sure, Eddie will always be the master, because he's the one who blazed the trail. And if we get an album's worth of an EVH clone, many will be able to tell the difference by the end of that album. Some, from the very beginning.

But we're not talking about an album, here, are we? Sorry, but guitarists are simply more feasible to imitate - if there are any "bottom lines" here, I'd say that's one.

Getting Eddie down is a colossal task, but if an axe-slinger has the right combination of aptitude and dedication, he can do it. But in imitating Dave or any other human voice and personality, there will always be a boundary set by simple GENETICS that's far more apparent, and far more jarring to the casual observer.

And how do you break down the essence of the EVH factor? Because his contribution was NOT just in his solos or in the uniqueness of his tone. It was also in the very riffs and songs he composed. And while his solos are duplicated only by the brightest of prodigies, his basic melodies and song structures are, by design, far more easily accessible.

Sorry, but while something's missing when you change instrumentalists - especially the world's most brilliant ones - something's still far more obviously missing when you change vocalists. And that's an order of magnitude more obvious in a live performance.

So keep mining for that "hypocrisy" all you like.

You're going to come up dry.

[ May 05, 2002 at 05:11 PM: Message edited by: The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug ]</p>

Glenn
05.05.02, 04:39 PM
Originally posted by The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug:
So keep mining for that "hypocrisy" all you like.The word 'mining' would suggest a person would have to dig deep to find hypocrisy. Fact is, you don't need a shovel, you barely even need a spoon!

MikeL
05.05.02, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug:
But in imitating Dave or any other human voice and personality, there will always be a boundary set by simple GENETICS that's far more apparent, and far more jarring to the casual observer.I've seen a couple of guys who have the Dave-thing down. Just like for the guitarists, they work hard at it and it pays off.

The real difference here is that EVH won't take somebody like that out on tour pretending it's 1983 again.

Why is it that some people try to over-inflate Dave's image so much? There's really no need to. It just magnifies his flaws. Dave stands just fine on his true merrits. He's declined markedly in the last decade, but that doesn't diminish his prior accomplishments.

tap1966
05.05.02, 05:23 PM
This thread is hysterical, it's just like what Van Halen appears to have become. Everything is about math, morality and motivation and nothing about the 90 minutes of magic when a rock'n'roll show kicks your ass.

Does anyone seriously care whether it's 75% of VH, or 25% or who should be playing what under whose name and why. It's ALL about the performance and delivery - VH3 was a decent show, way better than the album but Roth/Walsh/Luzier stomped all over it, at least it did for my eyes and ears.

The only people who enjoy Dave's shows are those in attendance it seems ;)

Stuff No More
05.06.02, 06:54 AM
Observation:

Most of the Sam/Dave tour complaints thus far come from Dave fans bitching about Sammy's choice of songs.

Question:

Has anyone noticed a Sammy fan say something like, "I hope Dave doesn't play..."?

dj88
05.06.02, 07:25 AM
Originally posted by Glenn:
Bottom line, EVH's voice is as imprinted on those songs as Dave's is.He sings backing vocals. I don't even notice his voice at all. The only one with a distict sound singing backup is Mike. It's a completely different thing changing backup vocals compared to the front man.
EVH and DLR are the ultimate matchup, but it's awfully hypocritical to say that you won't accept anyone but DLR SINGING Panama, but you'll accept Steve Vai, Brian Young, or any of the many guitar players in between PLAYING Panama!It's not hypocritical at all when you hire people that train themselves to play those songs note for note. When it sounds little or no different than the original then again you don't notice.
I also think it's funny how away from Dave, Eddie has to produce something that rivals Fair Warning or it's dismissed as a waste of time. And yet away from Eddie, Dave can produce work that is far below the Fair Warning standard and it's accepted that at least Dave is trying.Here's the deal. Dave is out there doing stuff, talking to the media and touring. Eddie is doing absolutely NOTHING, ignoring the fans, and dismantling what's left of his band. How can you even compare them?

And another thing. Dave wanted back in the band in '96 and it was Eddie that used him and the fans all in the name of selling BOV1. Can you blame Dave for getting his own band together since Eddie wouldn't have him back? Is it wrong to be angry with Eddie for putting together that piece of shit also known as VHIII instead of getting Dave back?

Maybe we do hold Eddie to a higher standard than Dave, but it's because everyone knows Dave belongs in VH and it's Eddie preventing that from happening.

That's my read on things anyway.

FORD
05.06.02, 07:54 AM
Originally posted by Stuff No More:
Observation:

Most of the Sam/Dave tour complaints thus far come from Dave fans bitching about Sammy's choice of songs.

Question:

Has anyone noticed a Sammy fan say something like, "I hope Dave doesn't play..."?Well, that's an easy one, Stuffy.

DAVE doesn't have any cheese ballads!

MikeL
05.06.02, 08:49 AM
Originally posted by dj88:
He sings backing vocals. I don't even notice his voice at all. I don't think Glenn was referring to Ed's singing voice. smile.gif


It's not hypocritical at all when you hire people that train themselves to play those songs note for note. When it sounds little or no different than the original then again you don't notice. So why doesn't Dave just use 100% pre-recorded note for note music? It'd be cheaper, and he wants to be the sole center of attention. For all intents and purposes that's what he's doing now. Van Halen karoke never sounded so good!


Is it wrong to be angry with Eddie for putting together that piece of shit also known as VHIII instead of getting Dave back?And is it wrong to be disappointed that Dave has been living this pathetic VH-fantasy since for years? Dave is coasting. Pardon me for pointing that out.


Maybe we do hold Eddie to a higher standard than Dave, but it's because everyone knows Dave belongs in VH and it's Eddie preventing that from happening.That's a crap reason to expect shitty work from Dave. Not only that, but do you really know it's Eddie that's working so hard to keep Dave down? I don't think you do. Most bits of news point to Dave being the decision maker post-2000.

Glenn
05.06.02, 09:46 AM
Originally posted by dj88:
He sings backing vocals. I don't even notice his voice at all. The only one with a distict sound singing backup is Mike. It's a completely different thing changing backup vocals compared to the front man.Dammit, I've really got to brush up on my writing skills I guess. :D Here's what I wrote originally, I'll highlight the important part; "Bottom line, EVH's voice is as imprinted on those songs as Dave's is. It's a musical voice, but it's a voice just the same."

[ May 06, 2002 at 10:47 AM: Message edited by: Glenn ]</p>

FORD
05.06.02, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by Glenn:
Dammit, I've really got to brush up on my writing skills I guess. :D Here's what I wrote originally, I'll highlight the important part; "Bottom line, EVH's voice is as imprinted on those songs as Dave's is. It's a musical voice, but it's a voice just the same."I understood what you meant by musical voice, but I think you're missing a key point, Glenn. Was Eddie's "voice" an integral part of creating that sound? Absolutely. But what we are talking about NOW is reproducing the sound. And in terms of reproducing the "voices", Dave with another guitarist comes closer to the original than Eddie with another singer does. Neither is a pefect reproduction, obviously.

At the time the first 2 Montrose albums were made, Ronnie Montrose was considered to be a damn good guitar player. After the band broke up, nothing else he ever did again had that same impact. As a matter of fact, his own band mates ditched him and went with Sammy. Now if you wanted to hear "Bad Motor Scooter" or "Make it Last" done live, who would do it better? Sammy and a decent guitarist, or Ronnie Montrose and whoever his current singer is? Bill Church and Denny Carmassi knew the answer to that question.

Just because Eddie is an infinitely better guitarist than Ronnie Montrose doesn't change the principle. While neither can surpass the original, it's definitely closer to the real thing the way Dave does it than a scenario like VDIII.

Glenn
05.06.02, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by FORD:
I understood what you meant by musical voice, but I think you're missing a key point, Glenn. Was Eddie's "voice" an integral part of creating that sound? Absolutely. But what we are talking about NOW is reproducing the sound. And in terms of reproducing the "voices", Dave with another guitarist comes closer to the original than Eddie with another singer does. I agree. Re-read the thread, I never suggested otherwise.

My opinions stated here were based on each individuals acceptance, or lack of acceptance, of the CONCEPT of using another person to perform work they didn't create, be that Sammy singing Dave's lyrics or Vai playing Eddie's riffs etc. What I was saying was, just on principle alone, if a person thinks Eddie shouldn't perform any Dave material without Dave, then that could be extended to say that Dave shouldn't perform any Eddie material without Eddie. Simple as that.

MikeL
05.06.02, 11:28 AM
If what you want is a sound that is reproduced in exacting detail, don't look for it with DLR. Stay home and spin your records. Dave has assembled a wonderful tribute band, and he plays his part as well as can be expected.

There's nothing wrong with nostalgia, but it's just sad. I think Glenn would agree with me when I say I'm lamenting wasted efforts and energy. It's really a shame that Dave has decided that being a shadow of his former self is enough. I don't agree with most of his cheerleaders who say something is better than nothing. This tribute thing was cool for one tour. It got old the second time around. Now it's just... the way Dave is. :(

The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug
05.06.02, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by Glenn:
...What I was saying was, just on principle alone, if a person thinks Eddie shouldn't perform any Dave material without Dave, then that could be extended to say that Dave shouldn't perform any Eddie material without Eddie. Simple as that.Oh, I gotcha now. :D

Sure, there's a perfect logical symmetry to that. Which is why I, for one, do not maintain that Dave has some sort of entitlement to Classic Van Halen that Eddie does not. The material belongs to both of them - there is no moral component giving one the advantage over the other in who gets to play it.

However, there will be differences in the execution between those first three quarters and the remaining one. It's fairly indisputable that the variations from the original performances are going to be far more subtle with the original vocalist and musicians studiously miming the originals, than it will be with the original musicians and a vocalist who (wisely) does not attempt any imitations.

To claim that Roth has some moral entitlement over 3/4 of Van Halen to the original lineup's material? The purest hypocrisy; agreed.

To express a preference, or some enthusiasm over the former that one might not with the latter? Sorry, but one can do that freely without any hypocrisy at all. Making fidelity to the original performances a key premise actually supports a preference for Roth, especially in a live context - and that's a fact.

And as for Dave stagnating... well, if it's the original material you want to see, you're likely to be a little less sensitive to such a notion in the first place.

Let's just see how he responds to Sammy's goad. There could be something quite novel in that... graemlins/devil.gif

[ May 06, 2002 at 03:19 PM: Message edited by: The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug ]</p>

SeriousDooDoo
05.06.02, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by lance watts:
Sure Dave is crazier than a Indian on Aquanet but there's no denying that he's got a realistic handle on what the fans want. Pure, 100%, uncut Van Halen. I'll suffer through live versions of Three Lock Box and I Can't Drive 55 anyday - as long as I get to hear DLR belt out the original songs that made VH a legendary band.

Look for me at the Gorge. I'll be the boozed-up nincompoop with the "Who the fuck is Sammy?" t-shirt.well howdeefuckingdoo, lance! bout time your ass shows up to the party. this place is a morgue, son. work a little magic, would you???

regarding your roth comment... no offense, but you didn't have to wait til this tour to hear dave sing his old vh tunes. he's been doing the same bit the last two decades or so.

SeriousDooDoo
05.06.02, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by MikeL:
If what you want is a sound that is reproduced in exacting detail, don't look for it with DLR. Stay home and spin your records. Dave has assembled a wonderful tribute band, and he plays his part as well as can be expected.

There's nothing wrong with nostalgia, but it's just sad. I think Glenn would agree with me when I say I'm lamenting wasted efforts and energy. It's really a shame that Dave has decided that being a shadow of his former self is enough. I don't agree with most of his cheerleaders who say something is better than nothing. This tribute thing was cool for one tour. It got old the second time around. Now it's just... the way Dave is. :( thanks. i've been trying to say the same thing since the tour was announced. you just did it a WHOLE lot better.

dj88
05.07.02, 06:11 AM
Originally posted by Glenn:
Dammit, I've really got to brush up on my writing skills I guess. :D Here's what I wrote originally, I'll highlight the important part; "Bottom line, EVH's voice is as imprinted on those songs as Dave's is. It's a musical voice, but it's a voice just the same."Sorry I didn't get that Glenn. My bad not yours. If that's what you meant then my response is you can mimic that sound almost exactly where as you can't mimic a human voice nearly as easily. Also Dave brings stage presence and attitude to the table.

dj88
05.07.02, 06:29 AM
Originally posted by MikeL:
So why doesn't Dave just use 100% pre-recorded note for note music? It'd be cheaper, and he wants to be the sole center of attention. For all intents and purposes that's what he's doing now. Van Halen karoke never sounded so good!I don't really understand your argument here Mike. What I've said is that Dave wants to front VH again. Since that isn't possible (for whatever reason) he's making his own VH. For that he needs someone that can play the old VH tunes. Brian Young is that person.
And is it wrong to be disappointed that Dave has been living this pathetic VH-fantasy since for years? Dave is coasting. Pardon me for pointing that out.You or anyone for that matter can be disappointed in Dave. That's your right as a fan. The question was asked why we're harder on Eddie than we are on Dave. The answer is obvious if you ask me. Eddie has hung it up and left his fans out to dry. Dave is giving the fans what they want which is classic Van Halen. Well, it's as close to classic VH as you're going to get since Eddie refuses to participate.

The only thing that disappoints me about Dave is his DVD looks like a big flaming turd so far. I can get past that though.
That's a crap reason to expect shitty work from Dave. Not only that, but do you really know it's Eddie that's working so hard to keep Dave down? I don't think you do. Most bits of news point to Dave being the decision maker post-2000.I don't expect shitty work from Dave, but I accept that he flops out a turd from time to time. As far as who's holding up the reunion... who the fuck knows what's really going on. I think Eddie low-balled Dave myself and will only take him on as an employee and not a full member of the band. IF that's the case then I don't blame Dave for saying no to that.

The Mighty STR
05.07.02, 07:02 AM
Originally posted by The SLAWTERHOUSE Bug:
And if Mr. Fingers is missing, there's someone in his place so faithful and carefully studied that he might trick you from time to time if you close your eyes - something that would NEVER happen with any other vocalist.So fucking true. So well put. graemlins/thumb.gif

Glenn
05.07.02, 10:40 AM
Originally posted by MikeL:
I think Glenn would agree with me when I say I'm lamenting wasted efforts and energy.You're right Mike, I do agree. I'm really hoping for a new studio album from Dave, because I'd like to hear where his creativity is at RIGHT NOW. Hell, I'm even hoping the DVD gets released because at least it will be something new to see and hear. But everytime Dave gets onstage with the 1986 and prior setlist and the 1986 and prior stage raps, I don't get any sense for where Dave's 2002 creativity is. I'm on record as saying I think Dave's voice is in tough shape, but he's obviously still got a ton of energy, and I don't believe he EVER lost his ability to co-write great songs. The further he goes with the VH tunes, the further away he gets from his solo stuff, which means there becomes less motivation and reason to release new solo stuff. That disappoints me, because given a choice, I would almost always choose an album over a live show.

USFestVet
05.07.02, 12:17 PM
Boy I see a lot of infighting here. The music from both sides is great and will be great to see live together each night. Let's all be stoked for Sam and Dave and enjoy the ride. graemlins/bounce.gif

Before this we had nothing going on at all!! Just random rumours and unfulfilled "insider tips."

Let these boys go out and rock and we'll all be better off. I bet Sam and Dave will both pick up fans from the other side. graemlins/thumb.gif

[ May 07, 2002 at 01:22 PM: Message edited by: USFestVet ]</p>