Should VH have taken a break after Fair Warning?? - Page 2

VH1988 · 11.17.09, 05:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThruVHfanatic

Well that exactly what I was saying all along. If they have had the nerve to take a break maybe just maybe things would have been more civil between the Bro's Halen, Dave and Mike even Sammy though, and maybe these years we may have had the reunion of a lifetime instead of a half assed money grabber nostalgia act that we got.

Come to think of it they should have stopped back then, when Dave quit/fired and release solo albums and shit like that. Nothing against Sammy God Blessed him, but I honestly believe that the Brothers hired Sammy just to get back at him, they got a hit when 5150 got release and wanted that to go as far as it went. 11 years later the shit hit the fan and then this whole mess of a can of worms open and you all know where things are now.

Sometimes I hate destiny

So even though the band commercially went onto greater heights with Sammy, had 4 #1 albums, more rock chart hits than any other band in history, and made new fans and delivered 5 great tours, you think they should have retired at 1984?

pffffffttttttttt..........

i1sum2! · 11.17.09, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThruVHfanatic

Well that exactly what I was saying all along. If they have had the nerve to take a break maybe just maybe things would have been more civil between the Bro's Halen, Dave and Mike even Sammy though, and maybe these years we may have had the reunion of a lifetime instead of a half assed money grabber nostalgia act that we got.

See, here's what I don't understand. You're saying that they should have taken a break after the FW tour, but realistically, the 1984 tour was waaaaaaay more grueling for those guys than any other tour. They were playing two or three nights stints in certain major cities that year. World wide too. They were so burned out during the tour and it showed as some shows were great while others lacked. Plus, you could tell that they were straining to make it work with each guy taking the solo spotlight and not so much as a group. If they needed to take any break, it would have been after that 1984 tour.

But still, Dave didn't want a break. Ya gotta admire that.

I agree with you that the last tour was not done in the right manner and could have been so much more had they done it with the original lineup. Ed fucked us over there. Again.

1981 tour has 83 dates listed, while the 1984 shows 108.

1981 Fair Warning tour

1984 World tour

VanHalenRules · 11.17.09, 10:33 AM

Pretty Woman being released as a single so shortly after the tour ended, IMHO, had a hand in the break up. The single did well, WB wanted an album to follow it up, and other than the original tunes on there, what IS on there speaks volumes of where the band and it's collective braintrust was at....at times it almost seemed as if, "Yeah, we'll use that, we need to fill an album" was the idea there. They seemed to regroup for 1984 and then it all came off the rails.

All in all, I believe you can blame the stress/pressure from the time the FW tour took off until the band finished the 1984 tour at least partially for the split.

batzilla · 11.17.09, 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Double Down

I think most guys at that time were drawn to VH because of Eddie. He was the coolest mofo going back then. If you were a teen/twenty guy following VH you had to think he was the coolest shit in music. He was VH, not Dave....as we came to find out.

AMEN BROTHER! I agree with this statement 100%. Edward WAS the shit back then. My friends and I were obsessed with listening to every single note that genius played. We all agreed Dave was rather annoying.

ThruVHfanatic · 11.17.09, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VanHalenRules

All in all, I believe you can blame the stress/pressure from the time the FW tour took off until the band finished the 1984 tour at least partially for the split.

That's exactly my whole point in this thread. I believe IMHO that the band should have taken a whole year off, Never release and I say this with all my heart that they shouldn't have release DIVER DOWN, take secrets and little guitars and put it on 1984. And go on tour that year. If tension was building they should have stopped the machine. But they were stubborn bastards so they decided to keep going until everything erupted to the point of hatred for one another. And Sammy got the brunt of Ed's anguish during the later years.

At0micPunk · 11.17.09, 11:14 PM

I can't think of many very popular iconic rock bands that stuck with the original lineup from the time they made it big until current day without break ups and personnel changes.. Rush...who else?

Wray · 11.18.09, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by At0micPunk

I can't think of many very popular iconic rock bands that stuck with the original lineup from the time they made it big until current day without break ups and personnel changes.. Rush...who else?

If not for Bonzo's death, Led Zeppelin would have had a great chance at accomplishing this.

Dutchie5150 · 11.18.09, 02:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by batzilla

AMEN BROTHER! I agree with this statement 100%. Edward WAS the shit back then. My friends and I were obsessed with listening to every single note that genius played. We all agreed Dave was rather annoying.

and some of us still believe it...

i1sum2! · 11.18.09, 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThruVHfanatic

That's exactly my whole point in this thread. I believe IMHO that the band should have taken a whole year off, Never release and I say this with all my heart that they shouldn't have release DIVER DOWN, take secrets and little guitars and put it on 1984. And go on tour that year. If tension was building they should have stopped the machine. But they were stubborn bastards so they decided to keep going until everything erupted to the point of hatred for one another.

There was some tension during the making of FW I suppose, as Ed wanted certain guitar parts his way, but, as a whole, the group didn't have that great of tension yet. It wasn't until the '84 tour when they had attained great success thru that release and constant exposure on MTV that they really let their egos get in the way of the band's continuing on. 1984 was the year when shit hit the fan, not before imo. Yeah, there was probably some tension, but not like it was later.

I also can't imagine in my mind placing the originals from DD on 1984. I don't think they would have flowed as good even if the songs were killer to begin with. I dunno. I can't hear those DD tunes back against the three or four stronger songs on '84. It's a different vibe altogether between the two albums. Each one has its own personality. $0.02

Warner Bros wasn't about to let them take a break either back then, as they were all for the band cranking out another album and another possible moneymaker for them. I think that once they saw what doing a cover (Pretty Woman) did for them and fans seemed to accept it, they decided to do more. That was mostly Dave's and Ted's idea from what has been written about DD covers. The thought was "Hey, if it's already been a hit for somebody else, we're halfway home"! All they had to do was "Halenize" it.

VH1988 · 11.18.09, 09:22 AM

Ed wanted to quit in 1981, id say the tension was bad enough.

i1sum2! · 11.18.09, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VH1988

Ed wanted to quit in 1981, id say the tension was bad enough.

True, as that has been written, but, I'd say that was more Ed's problem because nobody else was agreeing with him on the musical direction of FW and not so much other things. Later in their career, they would bitch at each other for any little thing. 1981 wasn't so much a band issue as it was Ed being whiny imo.

Kimmie5150 · 11.18.09, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by i1sum2!

True, as that has been written, but, I'd say that was more Ed's problem because nobody else was agreeing with him on the musical direction of FW and not so much other things. Later in their career, they would bitch at each other for any little thing. 1981 wasn't so much a band issue as it was Ed being whiny imo.

I agree with that Sum, but you know what I find funny? FW is probably my favorite album EVER, and there was clearly ALOT of tension between Ed and Dave. Ed's playing is just FREAKIN INSANE! And Dave's vocals! OMG!! HOLD ME BACK!!!

ZachenFoot · 11.18.09, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by At0micPunk

I can't think of many very popular iconic rock bands that stuck with the original lineup from the time they made it big until current day without break ups and personnel changes.. Rush...who else?

Technically Rush hasn't even done it. However, in defense of the argument and don't get me wrong, I do agree with you totally, the band would've never made it this far with the now-late John Rutsey. I think a lot of the maturation within the band came from Neil Peart's drum work and lyricism, thus keeping them going as long as they have.

I agree with Wray, I think Led Zep could've pulled it off had Bonzo never died. But you're right AP, I'd be hard pressed to name a band with the same lineup without personnel changes. I can name bands that lost members (Genesis, Bon Jovi) and didn't go out to replace them as "official" members, while keeping the same lineup intact (though in Genesis' case, Phil Collins wasn't on the first album, kinda like Peart for Rush).

See, I'm back-peddling trying to make a defense, but really your post is spot on. NO band goes all the way with the same lineup, and I think Rush has made it farther than anybody else.

sixstring · 11.18.09, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by At0micPunk

I can't think of many very popular iconic rock bands that stuck with the original lineup from the time they made it big until current day without break ups and personnel changes.. Rush...who else?

How 'bout ZZ Top?

40 years and STILL going.

LudwigVonDrumCrazy · 11.18.09, 12:42 PM

There's also U2...

but anyway....

you dont take a break while the iron is HOT like it was for them back in '81.

Its musical suicide...Eds talent or not, the public forgets you real quick if you don't keep pumping out the tunes. This was the 80's. There was no youtube, no WWW, no file sharing, etc..etc... all you had was the LP in hand.

I do agree with the post that said Ed should have told Dave to go do the EP and do a movie while the band did something on their own.

keeping the name out there on both ends yet no doing a world tour per se...