"Being kicked out of Van Halen hurt" - Michael Anthony

Ya think, Mike?

http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/michael-anthony-being-kicked-out-of-van-halen-hurt-179309?cpn=RSS&source=MRNEWS

Michael Anthony: "Being kicked out of Van Halen hurt"
The current 'Chickenfoot' bassist speaks out

Joe Bosso, Thu 30 Oct, 6:12 pm UTC


Michael Anthony is back on the good 'foot'

View in gallery
For Michael Anthony, forming the new supergroup Chickenfoot with Sammy Hagar, guitarist Joe Satriani and drummer Chad Smith, has been "a Godsend. You don't expect to get into something this incredible at my age."

"Being that the bassist spent much of his adult life as a founding member of Van Halen, he knows of where he speaks. In an exclusive interview with MusicRadar, Anthony recalls his shock of how he heard that Van Halen were reforming with singer David Lee Roth, an event he wasn't to be a part of.

"They took my pictures off the old record covers and replaced them with Wolfgang. Even the first album cover.""I found out when the rest of the fans found out, early last year," says Anthony. "I guess they tried to put something together earlier but it fell apart and Eddie had to go to rehab or something."

Being replaced by Eddie Van Halen's then-16-year-old son Wolfgang was a bitter blow, but it didn't compare to the sting Anthony felt when he clicked on the group's website and discovered that "they took my pictures off the old record covers and replaced them with Wolfgang. Even the first album cover.

"I mean, to think that somebody would go to the trouble of trying to erase me from the band's past, that hurt. But I think the fans felt the same way because a day or two later the website was changed and my pictures were put back."

Anthony's ego is very much restored with Chickenfoot, who are finishing their debut album under the guidance of producer Andy Johns. "In terms of pure enegry, Chickenfoot is like early Van Halen," he says. "It's four guys jammin' hard and playing live, which became less and less what Van Halen was all about as the years went on. We've gotten back to that, and it feels great."

Look for the full podcast interview with Michael Anthony on MusicRadar in the coming weeks."

Some minor criticism of of VH in recent years we hadn't heard before. Whoever did the erasing job of Mike on this web site is a real fuck face. Whoever ordered that is a sad waste of a human being.

Some minor criticism of of VH in recent years we hadn't heard before. Whoever did the erasing job of Mike on this web site is a real fuck face. Whoever ordered that is a sad waste of a human being.

And though it was only on the website for a couple of days, some of us fans will never forget it. Simply a low, classless move...

Some minor criticism of of VH in recent years we hadn't heard before. Whoever did the erasing job of Mike on this web site is a real fuck face. Whoever ordered that is a sad waste of a human being.

I don't think it's much of a mystery who's idea it was.

definately a dick move on the part of the webmaster...id like to think it wasnt ed and al involved in changing those album covers but i also never thought id have waited 10 years between vh albums(and still going). Cannot wait to hear "chickenfoot"...should be jammin

Some minor criticism of of VH in recent years we hadn't heard before. Whoever did the erasing job of Mike on this web site is a real fuck face. Whoever ordered that is a sad waste of a human being.

You can be sure it was one man in particular. :rolleyes:

definately a dick move on the part of the webmaster...id like to think it wasnt ed and al involved in changing those album covers but i also never thought id have waited 10 years between vh albums(and still going). Cannot wait to hear "chickenfoot"...should be jammin


It was a dick move to do what he was told by his employer (VH)???

So you'd like to think Ed and Al weren't involved...

Get out of the fantasy world...

Sorry to be harsh, but I know for a FACT it wasn't the webmaster's decision...

It does hurt when your heroes turn out to be assholes. I will always envy Eddie's virtuosity and songwriting skills but not him turning out to be a lousy, petty human being.

Isn't that what he said about Dave decades ago (yes two decades-plus ago).

Chickens come home to roost.

But for the fans, if this is strong and sober Ed I'd rather have him coke'd up and drunk.


Call me a dick. I want Ed strong and healthy but the best Eddie was the pre-90's Eddie.

Whatever, he doesn't care what we think and from now on unless he gives me something I'm interested in. I'm out.


OPEN THE VAULTS AND LET THE FANS IN!!!! Your hero Clapton did! You haven't released anything worth a listen in TEN YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm disgusted.

And though it was only on the website for a couple of days, some of us fans will never forget it. Simply a low, classless move...

I agree!!!

I stick up for the band quite a bit but with this...I couldn't. Just dumb.

As for Mike and his new band, I think the music will speak for itself. The way they are going about it in the studio should make for a rockin' album.

It is pretty hard to justify what VH did on that one. The only way they could get out of it would to just come out and say it was a mistake and apologize.

Its a cruel world......

The web page thing was definitely a classless move.....But Mike knows full well why he got the boot. I'm not saying I would've been so vindictive, nor do I defend it, but doing the Hagar tour back in the day (when Sam was still the boogey man) sealed his fate. He knew it the minute he walked on stage with Hagar for the first time.

Through all the fighting and obvious hatred with Dave over the years, that one moment of excluding Mike from the bands history, had to be chalked up as one of lowest points and embarrassing injustice for this band.

the website thing was an abomination.....I also think that replacing Mike with an untested 16 year old kid was a slap in the face to Mike. (again this really has nothing to do with wolf)

...But Mike knows full well why he got the boot. I'm not saying I would've been so vindictive, nor do I defend it, but doing the Hagar tour back in the day (when Sam was still the boogey man) sealed his fate. He knew it the minute he walked on stage with Hagar for the first time.

Nonsense. If you were Mike, and your boss never said jack to you about when we were going to tour or record, you'd move on too. What is he supposed to do, sit around and watch the grass grow? He grew tired of the VH Bros inactivity. His thing with Hagar was merely a side project until VH did get something going again. Why is it okay for Ed to go and do side projects like the Starfleet thing with Brian May yrs. ago but it's not okay for Mike to go and play a few dates alongside Hagar? You can't have it both ways. Ed was just plain being a petty little bitch here.

definately a dick move on the part of the webmaster...id like to think it wasnt ed and al involved in changing those album covers but i also never thought id have waited 10 years between vh albums(and still going). Cannot wait to hear "chickenfoot"...should be jammin

There's no way on God's Green Earth that Eddie Van Halen wasn't at least consulted beforehand about changing those covers. No possible way that something as momentous as that wasn't run by Ed, a notorious control freak.


The sad truth, is that Ed didn't ride to the rescue the next day and correct something he knew nothing about. The sad truth, is that it was probably his idea to begin with.

It is pretty hard to justify what VH did on that one. The only way they could get out of it would to just come out and say it was a mistake and apologize.

Or a joke (just kidding).

Getting unceremoniously kicked out of the band is pretty shitty, but to be removed off the cover of all of the albums that you were a part of is uncalled for.

Eddie may be 53, but due to all the substance abuse, he may still have the maturity of a teenager. I ve heard many people in recovery talk about how alcohol and drugs stunt growth in many ways.

It is pretty hard to justify what VH did on that one. The only way they could get out of it would to just come out and say it was a mistake and apologize.
The only way to fix that injustice towards Mike now is for the band to publicly apologize to him for the "mistake" and invite him to rejoin the band...

The web page thing was definitely a classless move.....But Mike knows full well why he got the boot. I'm not saying I would've been so vindictive, nor do I defend it, but doing the Hagar tour back in the day (when Sam was still the boogey man) sealed his fate. He knew it the minute he walked on stage with Hagar for the first time.

It's really sad...knowing what we know now about what went down.....to hear people still make the claim that it was the 2006 Tour with Hagar that lead to Mikey's firing from VH.



Really sad.

I thought it was the interview in that japanese magazine that finally pissed them off to the point of no return.

definately a dick move on the part of the webmaster...id like to think it wasnt ed and al involved in changing those album covers but i also never thought id have waited 10 years between vh albums(and still going). Cannot wait to hear "chickenfoot"...should be jammin

They took new photos of Wolfgang. Eddie woulda known about that.

Ed is a complete dick. It is a shame when you find out your so called "hero" is a piece of shit. If Ed keeps going on this way, maybe he will be erased from the fans memories, wouldn't that stick it up his ass! The best thing would be for Ed to learn some humility although I doubt that's possible this late in the game. Maybe when he hits the club circuit after a few more years of inactivity, after he looses the hanger's on, maybe just maybe he might sign an autograph. That is if anyone even wants it. I know I don't anymore.

Mike never joined Sam's band. He was never part of the waboritas. He also never joined a complete tour. He was never part of every show. He made some guest appearances on a few songs. No more, no less.

It was just an excuse - Mike was never in two bands.

Mike never joined Sam's band. He was never part of the waboritas. He also never joined a complete tour. He was never part of every show. He made some guest appearances on a few songs. No more, no less.

It was just an excuse - Mike was never in two bands.

You are 110% correct.:thumb:

Nonsense. If you were Mike, and your boss never said jack to you about when we were going to tour or record, you'd move on too. What is he supposed to do, sit around and watch the grass grow? He grew tired of the VH Bros inactivity. His thing with Hagar was merely a side project until VH did get something going again. Why is it okay for Ed to go and do side projects like the Starfleet thing with Brian May yrs. ago but it's not okay for Mike to go and play a few dates alongside Hagar? You can't have it both ways. Ed was just plain being a petty little bitch here.

Actually Mike said in the Long Road to Cabo that he called Eddie and Alex before touring with Hagar (in 2002) and they were fine with it then at the time.

Anyways, about the album covers thing, I was really disgusted. Still am actually, and it's probably a very big reason why I didn't waste my money on this last tour. I hope that it wasn't Brad Stark(s)? that did it, because as I recall Mike was the only one who thanked him on the BOBW compilation. But it was all orchestrated by Eddie just same.

Ed is a complete dick. It is a shame when you find out your so called "hero" is a piece of shit. If Ed keeps going on this way, maybe he will be erased from the fans memories, wouldn't that stick it up his ass! The best thing would be for Ed to learn some humility although I doubt that's possible this late in the game. Maybe when he hits the club circuit after a few more years of inactivity, after he looses the hanger's on, maybe just maybe he might sign an autograph. That is if anyone even wants it. I know I don't anymore.

It doesn't matter what Van Halen does from here on out, in about 15 years they'll make the cover of Rolling Stone for being the band that destroyed themselves the most. Everything that one loves about Van Halen is history, and long history ago at that. People can go on and on about what Eddie did to make Van Halen, but he did twice as much to destroy it. I don't even respect him anymore, which is sad to say.

No matter who was responsible, it was a lame deal all around. :(

http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/9696/vh1airbrushlb0.jpg
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/8381/amikept2.jpg

Wow Chef you saved those??? I could not believe they actually did that to those classics. How do you try and erase history like that? Lame.

It's nice to hear from Mikey though. The way he was booted from VH was and still is BS.

Actually Mike said in the Long Road to Cabo that he called Eddie and Alex before touring with Hagar (in 2002) and they were fine with it then at the time.

Anyways, about the album covers thing, I was really disgusted. Still am actually, and it's probably a very big reason why I didn't waste my money on this last tour. I hope that it wasn't Brad Stark(s)? that did it, because as I recall Mike was the only one who thanked him on the BOBW compilation. But it was all orchestrated by Eddie just same.

You see, if the Bros really did say that to Mike in 2002, then they're contradicting themselves once again. So then Mike went out and played a few dates with Hagar on the Sam & Dave tour that year, which I saw, and it wasn't like he committed to do the whole tour, just a few dates when he could schedule it. The day of the show I saw in '02, I heard Mike do a live radio interview and he said verbatim when the DJ asked him "Why are you not doing anything in Van Halen right now". He said that it he really didn't have any idea what was going to happen or know what direction the VH Bros were headed. Then he went on to say "What am I supposed to do, sit at home and watch the grass grow"? and that's why I made the comment of that. He also said that Hagar offered to him to join up when he could and Mike said "Sure, I'll be there" because he loves to get out and play live.

I too, find it absolutely appalling that they chose to remove him from the covers. That was classless on their part. You can bet your ass that Ed knew about it.

Anyone that thinks Ed didn't know about it or isn't completely responsible for the removal of MA from the covers is either naive or going out of their way to be blind to the truth...

The thing that sucks most is I believe MA is so fan oriented, that even after all the shit he has endured over the last few years from the VH camp, he would put up with more of it if it meant playing with the original band for the fans' enjoyment... He doesn't deserve that and I don't think any fan would hold it against him if he told them to fuck themselves if the opportunity presented itself...

Ed's a fucking piece of shit.

Ed's a fucking piece of shit.

It's getting pretty hard to deny.

Questions that never get asked. Things that Ed hasn't said yet.

LINKWORLD: Will Michael Anthony ever be a part of Van Halen again... even as just an old friend.

ED: Me and Al... and Roth... have a whole new album written, rehersed and ready to record. We were hoping to get Mike in here to help Wolfie with his low end problem, but of course... the bass player is off playing in other bands... as usual. With a new record to do and Wolf graduating this year... that's alot of shit for the little dude to carry. We will just have to push every thing back till after my wedding... Wolfies my best man too!... that's even more preasure on the boy. We were all ready to go and Mike didn't call.



I'm bored and listening to Extreme and making shit up. :drunk: Cheers!

Questions that never get asked. Things that Ed hasn't said yet.

LINKWORLD: Will Michael Anthony ever be a part of Van Halen again... even as just an old friend.

ED: Me and Al... and Roth... have a whole new album written, rehersed and ready to record. We were hoping to get Mike in here to help Wolfie with his low end problem, but of course... the bass player is off playing in other bands... as usual. With a new record to do and Wolf graduating this year... that's alot of shit for the little dude to carry. We will just have to push every thing back till after my wedding... Wolfies my best man too!... that's even more preasure on the boy. We were all ready to go and Mike didn't call.



I'm bored and listening to Extreme and making shit up. :drunk: Cheers!

Throw in a few slanderous comments and remove any mention of Mike's name and it's believable!

Throw in a few slanderous comments and remove any mention of Mike's name and it's believable!

That, and Wolf being a sexy cat an' all. Ed will never live that one down.

Nonsense. If you were Mike, and your boss never said jack to you about when we were going to tour or record, you'd move on too. What is he supposed to do, sit around and watch the grass grow? He grew tired of the VH Bros inactivity. His thing with Hagar was merely a side project until VH did get something going again. Why is it okay for Ed to go and do side projects like the Starfleet thing with Brian May yrs. ago but it's not okay for Mike to go and play a few dates alongside Hagar? You can't have it both ways. Ed was just plain being a petty little bitch here.

don't forget the big one: Ed playing on "beat it" and not telling anyone about it. it's funny all this time and i never even thought about that side of the argument. that ed can play with whoever he wants but god forbid if Mike wants to go play a few dates with someone who he considers a friend.

anyway Andrew also made the great observation that those of us who remember seeing that VH1 cover with ed's kid on it will never forget how low a blow that really was.

VH the band and its members have not made a good decision in 23 years......

don't forget the big one: Ed playing on "beat it" and not telling anyone about it. it's funny all this time and i never even thought about that side of the argument. that ed can play with whoever he wants but god forbid if Mike wants to go play a few dates with someone who he considers a friend.

anyway Andrew also made the great observation that those of us who remember seeing that VH1 cover with ed's kid on it will never forget how low a blow that really was.

VH the band and its members have not made a good decision in 23 years......

Yep, the Michael Jackson thing, I had forgotten about that one. Thanks for reminding me. Another good case in point.:thumb:

It's funny how people seem to forget that Mikey and Sam have had a little side project (Los Tres Gusanos) since the early 90's. I don't think Ed or Al had a problem with them jamming together at all. I think the problem came in when they put a "group: together and called it "The Other Half" and played nothing but VH songs. That, at least IMO, is a bit of a kick in the guts to Ed and Al, but, that was probably more Sammy's doing than Mike's.

I understand that the band were inactive for a long time, but that to me, wasn't the right thing to do. It's not so much the songs they played, but the name they used... Thats the way I see it, anyways.

It's also interesting to see that people have seem to have forgotten that while there has been a lot of years between albums, they have had some good excesses for not releasing any. Remember the Cancer, Hip replacement, Al's neck problems, the divorce, parents dieing, the rehabs, NO SINGER... It's important to remember that.

Maybe, Ed should of released an album or 2 between his chemotherapy sessions... Maybe that would of made the "fans" happy.

Also, Mike has stated in several interviews that he didn't hear from Ed or Al for several years between the last few tours he was on... WTF... Hasn't Mikey got a phone or a car. Communication is a two way street. Maybe, if he put a bit more effort into things, he might still be in the band. It's easy for everyone to lay blame on Ed and Al for Mike's dismissle, but like everything in life, there is always more than one side to every story.

The whole album photo swapping thing... Good lord people... get a life. Who fucking cares. It lasted a few days and it was gone. If Ed had anything to do with it (like everyone thinks), the photos would be still up. If he had gone to all that trouble to get photos taken and the photos switched and everything,
it would of lasted more than a few days... and don't say it was taken down because of the fan backlash, because, if I'm to believe everything I read here, Ed doesn't give a shit what the fans think... Anyway, if he did care, I'm sure Mikey would of been a part of this last tour because there wasn't too much backlash about that now, was there .

Also, one last thing, while Ed was fighting his cancer and getting his hip replaced and whatever, where was Mike? Out jamming with Sammy...

Imagine, if you will, if it was Mike who had the cancer or hip replacement or whatever and Ed and Al still went out and toured... I can't imagine what you all would be saying about them... Actually, I can.

Well, I certainly don't agree with you in any way, shape, or form mate. You say they had no singer? When? Ed auditioned several singers back then, had Mitch Malloy hired when they (VH) went to do the '96 MTV Awards with Dave present. Malloy knew where he stood and bailed. Then the deal with Dave folded. Ed gets Cherbone to replace him. They make a record and tour for said record. Then, management gave Gary the boot more or less, depending on who you believe. Ed could have any singer in the world. All he has to do is say they've got the job, end of story. Then, all of Ed's problems with cancer etc. happened. Sure, we aren't forgetting those things but, he still was the leader of the band and should have said to the rest what the game plan was instead of remaining quiet. And yeah, communication is a two way street, but when your the employee, shouldn't the boss make the first move by calling? I certainly do. It wasn't up to Mike to do that. Why should he have to kiss Ed's ass? He didn't, and I'm glad. Like I've said previously in this thread, Mike wasn't going to sit around and watch the grass grow, as he shouldn't. Instead, he went out and played a few gigs with Hagar, nothing more to it than that. Why Ed had a problem with him doing that is beyond me when all Ed and Alex were doing was sitting on there asses not doing or wanting to do anything I should say. If you were in a major rock band that had been successful for years, would you want to remain idle? I sure wouldn't. So Mike went out and played, big deal. It seems to me that if Ed really cared about having a band and keeping them close, then he would have made more of an effort to do just that. But he didn't, until it was too late. And we really don't know what his beef is with Mike either. Personally, it all seems ridiculously childish to me. And to can Mike and deny the fans one last reunion and blast around the globe? WTF? He blew it big time there, no mistaking it. They could have rode off into the sunset with an even bigger pile of cash than they did last year AND went out with having the fans respect as well. And I don't understand why you think it's perfectly okay to remove Mike from their history either. It wasn't okay by any means. Taking him off of the album covers was absolutely classless and uncalled for. Ed may have had his differences with Mike, but to go one step further with that bullshit move was beyond vicious. You know when Ed is such a control freak that the idea did in fact, come from him. Brad Starks, their webmaster, probably can't make a fucking move without Ed's approval for what content goes on the official site too.

Everything DOES come back to Ed, whether you like that or not. It's his band.

I'm just happy we never got re-released versions of all the albums with Wolfie playing instead of Mike like what Ozzy pulled a few years back when he had his touring musicians replace the original recording artists (AND SONGWRITERS). I know Sharon runs the show, but since Ozzy allowed it, I really lost any bit of respect I had left for him.

You say they had no singer? When?


Between 1999 - 2004 & 2005 - 2007


Ed could have any singer in the world. All he has to do is say they've got the job, end of story.


and...

and he chose to stay home and recover from cancer instead.... What a selfish bastard.


but when your the employee, shouldn't the boss make the first move by calling? I certainly do. It wasn't up to Mike to do that. Why should he have to kiss Ed's ass?


WTF??? Thats probably the most ridicules things I have read here... and thats saying something...


And I don't understand why you think it's perfectly okay to remove Mike from their history either. It wasn't okay by any means. Taking him off of the album covers was absolutely classless and uncalled for. Ed may have had his differences with Mike, but to go one step further with that bullshit move was beyond vicious. You know when Ed is such a control freak that the idea did in fact, come from him. Brad Starks, their webmaster, probably can't make a fucking move without Ed's approval for what content goes on the official site too.


I never said it was OK. It was definitely a stupid thing to do. I just don't think it was Ed that demanded it to be done. It was probably done as a joke that back fired big time. I'm sure Ed (and Al, for that matter) had bigger and better things to deal with at that time.

Also, you do realize that it was really only one cover Mikey was removed from, don't you (VH1). A lot of people miss the fact that ALL FOUR MEMBERS were removed from the WACF cover... I guess we see only want we want to see...

Also, you do realize that it was really only one cover Mikey was removed from, don't you (VH1). A lot of people miss the fact that ALL FOUR MEMBERS were removed from the WACF cover... I guess we see only want we want to see...

seriously?? you can't see why all 4 members were removed from WACF?? For one thing....think about this. How many albums is Mike on the cover? 2. VH1 and WACF. However on WACF it is a group picture. You can't just cut Mike out of a group picture. And you can't insert Wolfgang into a 25+ year old picture. The other cover was not a group picture, but four individual pictures. So instead of replacing Mike, because they couldn't, they just got rid of the whole thing. What other explanation do you have?? They didn't change any of the other covers and the VH1 cover only replaced Mike.

WTF??? Thats probably the most ridicules things I have read here... and thats saying something...

Can you not see that Ed has wronged Mike Anthony in the past? Obviously not! Clearly, Ed owes Mike an apology for all this bullshit of kicking him out without any reason. Mike had to find out thru the Internet like the rest of us. And you think Mike should pick up the phone and call Ed? Jayzuz H. Kerrhist! Part of an alcoholics rehabilitation is to make amends with all that they've wronged, so Ed better start with Mike.

I never said it was OK. It was definitely a stupid thing to do. I just don't think it was Ed that demanded it to be done. It was probably done as a joke that back fired big time. I'm sure Ed (and Al, for that matter) had bigger and better things to deal with at that time.

You don't think that Ed did this? Are you fucking kidding me? Open your eyes and see what went down between those two. Brad Starks cannot do anything with their official site without Ed's say so/approval for any content. And you think they did that as a joke? It was hardly seen as one by anybody. Surely you've read around here (and elsewhere) from the fans voicing their disapproval of that? And what praytell, could Ed and Alex had to deal with at the time of this? NOTHING! That's right, NOTHING!:rolleyes:

Also, you do realize that it was really only one cover Mikey was removed from, don't you (VH1). A lot of people miss the fact that ALL FOUR MEMBERS were removed from the WACF cover... I guess we see only want we want to see...

It doesn't matter who was removed nor what album cover, as it never should have happened. That is the point here. And yes, thee only thing I'll agree with you on is we all see just what we want to see.

Also, you do realize that it was really only one cover Mikey was removed from, don't you (VH1). A lot of people miss the fact that ALL FOUR MEMBERS were removed from the WACF cover... I guess we see only want we want to see...

Uh the reason they all were removed was because there was no way to get Mike out of that photo, would kind of have looked stupid to Photoshop Wolfie's face over Mike's. Although I wouldn't have been surprised if they did that.

If they could have gotten him out without getting rid of other guys, they would have! The bottom line is they went through the trouble of making sure to remove ANY trace of Mike on their album covers.

Wake up man.

Uh the reason they all were removed was because there was no way to get Mike out of that photo, would kind of have looked stupid to Photoshop Wolfie's face over Mike's. Although I wouldn't have been surprised if they did that.

If they could have gotten him out without getting rid of other guys, they would have! The bottom line is they went through the trouble of making sure to remove ANY trace of Mike on their album covers.

Wake up man.

Ya think? :D

http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/3914/vanhalenwomenandchildrelg2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Would you be surprised?

Nope.

To the fella who thinks Ed didn't greenlight the album cover change...dude, seriously, buy a clue.

...dude, seriously, buy a clue.

Can I solve the puzzle?

Can I solve the puzzle?

LOL. You bet.

Dudes who _ _ ven't yet re_lized Ed is _ coc_suc_er

Dudes who haven't yet realized Ed is a cocksucker

:bounce:

Anyone that thinks Ed didn't know about it or isn't completely responsible for the removal of MA from the covers is either naive or going out of their way to be blind to the truth...

The thing that sucks most is I believe MA is so fan oriented, that even after all the shit he has endured over the last few years from the VH camp, he would put up with more of it if it meant playing with the original band for the fans' enjoyment... He doesn't deserve that and I don't think any fan would hold it against him if he told them to fuck themselves if the opportunity presented itself...

It still could of been a cruel joke.

Uh the reason they all were removed was because there was no way to get Mike out of that photo, would kind of have looked stupid to Photoshop Wolfie's face over Mike's. Although I wouldn't have been surprised if they did that.

If they could have gotten him out without getting rid of other guys, they would have! The bottom line is they went through the trouble of making sure to remove ANY trace of Mike on their album covers.

Wake up man.

Wouldn't it of been easier for them just not to put the covers up on the web page instead of going though all that crap just to remove a picture of Mike??? Thats why I don't believe Ed or Al had anything to do with it because I'm sure they have better things to do with their lives. If they didn't, they would probably be members here... ;)

Look, I know I could be wrong about this (wouldn't be the first time I've be wrong), but so could everybody here...

Has anyone ever got in contact with the web master?

Nope.

To the fella who thinks Ed didn't greenlight the album cover change...dude, seriously, buy a clue.

So, where do I buy this clue???

Hopefully, they sell lives there too and we can go half's.

Wouldn't it of been easier for them just not to put the covers up on the web page instead of going though all that crap just to remove a picture of Mike??? Thats why I don't believe Ed or Al had nothing to do with it because I'm sure they have better things to do with their lives. If they didn't, they would probably be members here... ;)

Look, I know I could be wrong about this (wouldn't be the first time I've be wrong), but so could everybody here...

Has anyone ever got in contact with the web master?

But the INTENTION all along was to remove EVERY aspect of Mike. How in the holy hell can you even entertain the thought of it being anyone other than Ed & Al doing this when everybody knows that Ed flat out detests Mike? He forced him to sign over all claims he had to anything VH related, they removed his name from the old writing credits, and Ed explicitly said "Sauce Sobleweski can do whatever the hell he wants" in that horrid Stern interview a few years ago.
Basically they Ed tried and tried and tried to force Wolfgang's image down people's throats by editing out Mike wherever he had to and replacing him with his kid.
Of all the things that are disputable, arguable, unknown, or unapparent about this band, THIS IS NOT ONE OF THEM. We all know how it went down, it's basically fact, not really speculation at all. Yes it would have easier to keep the album covers off, and they would have if Ed didn't get involved.

Wouldn't it of been easier for them just not to put the covers up on the web page instead of going though all that crap just to remove a picture of Mike??? Thats why I don't believe Ed or Al had anything to do with it because I'm sure they have better things to do with their lives. If they didn't, they would probably be members here... ;)

Look, I know I could be wrong about this (wouldn't be the first time I've be wrong), but so could everybody here...

Has anyone ever got in contact with the web master?

Good god, man. Nobody here who believes Ed approved of the album tweaks is wrong. You are the one that's wrong. The webbie isn't gonna say jack shit...."Oh yes, that was an error, Ed would never do anything like that to Michael Anthony."

If you just can't accept the fact that Ed can be that much of a dick....too bad. The evidence has only been right in front of your face for about, oh, thirteen years or so.

So, where do I buy this clue???


Let's see....as far as where you can buy clues...hmm. You could buy another copy of VH3 (collector's tin edition!). You could buy a copy of BOBW and listen to the three tracks on there cut without Mike's vocals. You could buy transcripts of the number of interviews with Sam or Mike describing how Ed wanted to dick Mike over in '04, and how he DID dick Mike over in '07. You could buy Dave's book, wherein he describes the '96 debacle. You could've purchased air fare and tickets to either the Sammy '04 tour or the Dave VH 4 '07-'08 tour and saw for yourself the awkward crap of Eddie's boozing or the fake bass playing or the faux comraderie.

Lots of clues have been available for sale. :D

Aussies. Poor guys, most of you always wanna give Ed the benefit of the doubt, probably 'cause all you ever got was a short visit via III, and it looks like us stateside Americanos get all the cream.

Some minor criticism of of VH in recent years we hadn't heard before. Whoever did the erasing job of Mike on this web site is a real fuck face. Whoever ordered that is a sad waste of a human being.

All fingers are pointing at your leader... Edward Van Fuckface

:D

But the INTENTION all along was to remove EVERY aspect of Mike. How in the holy hell can you even entertain the thought of it being anyone other than Ed & Al doing this when everybody knows that Ed flat out detests Mike? He forced him to sign over all claims he had to anything VH related, they removed his name from the old writing credits, and Ed explicitly said "Sauce Sobleweski can do whatever the hell he wants" in that horrid Stern interview a few years ago.

They also hated DLR with a passion for 20+ years, but they didn't take his name off the writing credits... Why??? because DLR actually wrote for VH. Mike didn't. If Mike did write anything for VH, there is no way they could of had his name taken off the credits. Why should they keep paying him for songs him didn't write when he isn't in the band anymore.... Name me one band who wouldn't of done the same thing....

What does the "Sauce Sobleweski" thing have anything to do with it???

Let's see....as far as where you can buy clues...hmm. You could buy another copy of VH3 (collector's tin edition!). You could buy a copy of BOBW and listen to the three tracks on there cut without Mike's vocals. You could buy transcripts of the number of interviews with Sam or Mike describing how Ed wanted to dick Mike over in '04, and how he DID dick Mike over in '07. You could buy Dave's book, wherein he describes the '96 debacle. You could've purchased air fare and tickets to either the Sammy '04 tour or the Dave VH 4 '07-'08 tour and saw for yourself the awkward crap of Eddie's boozing or the fake bass playing or the faux comraderie.

Lots of clues have been available for sale. :D

Aussies. Poor guys, most of you always wanna give Ed the benefit of the doubt, probably 'cause all you ever got was a short visit via III, and it looks like us stateside Americanos get all the cream.

You seem to have a problem with Aussies, yeah?? Thats the second or third time I've seen you post something like this. You think we don't know our shit down here because VH only came here once??? I'll go one on one with anybody on the topic of VH. You're right, I've only seen VH live once. Does that make me any different or less knowledgeable than someone who has seen them 5 or 10 times??? The only difference between me and someone who has seen them 5 times is about 8 hours...

You say that all you "stateside Americanos" get all the cream... and yet you complain about the 2004 & 2007 tours.... Make you mind up buddy.

I've got plenty of 2007/2008 DVDs here and I don't care what you say,those shows are awesome.

They also hated DLR with a passion for 20+ years, but they didn't take his name off the writing credits... Why??? because DLR actually wrote for VH. Mike didn't. If Mike did write anything for VH, there is no way they could of had his name taken off the credits. Why should they keep paying him for songs him didn't write when he isn't in the band anymore.... Name me one band who wouldn't of done the same thing....



Man, you simply insist on digging your own hole hole deeper, don't you? Rather than accepting the fact that people have shown you how incorrect you are, instead you plow right along with even more logic-defying nonsense.

OK, when VH started the writing credits were split 4 ways, to keep things even. No, Mike did not write the tunes, and neither did ALEX for that matter. Yet a deal is a deal, and everyone went along with it. Funnily enough, in order for Mike to tour with this "band" in 2004, he needed to sign away his entitlement to any further claims of ownership of the songs composed during his tenure with the band. Yes, he still gets paid, yet at a noticeably reduced amount and he can not expect to profit from any new ventures by the band. And since you apparently are not quite bright enough to connect the dots, the "Sauce Sobleweski" comment vividly displays Eddie Van Halen's child-like petulance in all of this, which is why it was mentioned.

Removing a former member's image from the "band's" collective memory is nothing new, or did you somehow fail to notice that David Lee Roth's likeness was noticeably absent from the money grabbing BOBW collection? And rather than include 3 more new tunes or significant classics missing from the collection, the "band" chose to include three Roth era tunes sung by Sam Hagar, in particularly galling fashion from a so-so live album?

Come on man. Your logic holds water as aptly as a cheese grater.

You think we don't know our shit down here because VH only came here once???

I don't know, you don't seem to.

Come on man. Your logic holds water as aptly as a cheese grater.

Fanboys don't much like logicks. ;)

I'll go one on one with anybody on the topic of VH. You're right, I've only seen VH live once. Does that make me any different or less knowledgeable than someone who has seen them 5 or 10 times??? The only difference between me and someone who has seen them 5 times is about 8 hours...


No, there seems to be a few more differences than 8 hours. :)

And you're not doing too well on the topic of VH as it is in a public thread. I doubt you would hold up one on one.

You're right, I've only seen VH live once. Does that make me any different or less knowledgeable than someone who has seen them 5 or 10 times???


This quandary comes up a lot. And nobody questions your enthusiasm as a fan, nor the younger members' fanaticism either. But I'm sorry to break the bad tidings...yes, people who were there, who've attended more tours, seen more eras, lived and breathed it, tend to have more personal hands on experience regarding a thing, be it Van Halen or anything else. You could be the biggest WWII buff on the planet, but you will never ever have the insight some fella who landed on Omaha has, even if he hasn't thought of it since. It's just how life is. There are such roles as senior statesmen because of the actuality experiences, not through fucking bootlegs or research or books or forums or listening to the albums over and over. It's just like the kiddies who preach to the geezers about the Dave era, but never SAW the Dave era. It just will never hold up, not against those who were there. Sorry. I don't tell Zeppelin fans who got to see the fuckers live how, who, and what Zep is or isn't. I bow to their greater experience. I can be as much a fan, but I cannot be as versed, nor will I ever be.

That's life.

This quandary comes up a lot. And nobody questions your enthusiasm as a fan, nor the younger members' fanaticism either. But I'm sorry to break the bad tidings...yes, people who were there, who've attended more tours, seen more eras, lived and breathed it, tend to have more personal hands on experience regarding a thing, be it Van Halen or anything else. You could be the biggest WWII buff on the planet, but you will never ever have the insight some fella who landed on Omaha has, even if he hasn't thought of it since. It's just how life is. There are such roles as senior statesmen because of the actuality experiences, not through fucking bootlegs or research or books or forums or listening to the albums over and over. It's just like the kiddies who preach to the geezers about the Dave era, but never SAW the Dave era. It just will never hold up, not against those who were there. Sorry. I don't tell Zeppelin fans who got to see the fuckers live how, who, and what Zep is or isn't. I bow to their greater experience. I can be as much a fan, but I cannot be as versed, nor will I ever be.

That's life.

Thank you. I've made the exact same argument around here more than once but for some reason it gets dismissed rather easily. I completely agree with that entire point of view. I've argued that point more in the sports thread than anywhere else but the premise is the same.

I don't know how old Dutchie is but I'm certain there are many others like me who roll their eyes when we see these youngin's born after F.U.C.K. speak with such authority on VH. It's ridiculous.

Thank you. I've made the exact same argument around here more than once but for some reason it gets dismissed rather easily. I completely agree with that entire point of view. I've argued that point more in the sports thread than anywhere else but the premise is the same.

I don't know how old Dutchie is but I'm certain there are many others like me who roll their eyes when we see these youngin's born after F.U.C.K. speak with such authority on VH. It's ridiculous.

I've made the argument for years as well. It's almost irrelevant...quite obviously direct experience is a greater tool of knowledge than observation from afar or personal investment with virtually anything, not just entertainment acts. People who argue otherwise, almost invariably are simply venting their frustrations at NOT experiencing it firsthand, and are overcompensating with passion and their right at expressing opinion. And they're entitled. But there are elders in every aspect of societies, cyber or forum or village or corporate or family, that always have to receive their dues, because that's how wheels roll. Yes, some opinions bear more weight than others. Hands-on will always trump dedication. Always.

There are a handful of cats around here (the ones who aren't LYING, which all too often happens, alas) who got to see the Dave era pre-Fair Warning, when Dave was at his peak singing-wise. Guys who saw them open for Sabbath, guys who saw the World Vacation and Invasion tours. I give those guys the respect they've earned 'cause they were there. I've seen every tour since 'Warning, but there are still elders who outweigh me experience-wise. The same older fellas who dragged me against their will to 'Warning at the Forum and the shithole UsFest in Devore, a few of those guys saw VH in Pasadena and Glendale playing backyard parties, or on Sunset just before being discovered. I'll NEVER be able to tell those dudes jack shit about the real nitty gritty of Van Halen, no matter how much a fan I became afterward.

Thank you. I've made the exact same argument around here more than once but for some reason it gets dismissed rather easily. I completely agree with that entire point of view. I've argued that point more in the sports thread than anywhere else but the premise is the same.

I don't know how old Dutchie is but I'm certain there are many others like me who roll their eyes when we see these youngin's born after F.U.C.K. speak with such authority on VH. It's ridiculous.

Believe me, you're not alone.

For a long time I was a Beatles fanatic. Read every book I could get my hands on, listened to every album non stop, completely immersed myself in them. No matter how much I studied them though, it still isn't the same thing as living through it. It still doesn't change the fact they broke up 8 months before I was born. I would never try to tell somebody who actually lived through that era how it was.

When I see somebody who wasn't even born when DLR was in the band, trying to tell me about VH I can't take it seriously.

When I see somebody who wasn't even born when DLR was in the band, trying to tell me about VH I can't take it seriously.

I, uh, tend to condescend when those kiddies lecture Rothisms.

Maybe it's noticeable, I dunno. :confused: :p

I, uh, tend to condescend when those kiddies lecture Rothisms.

Maybe it's noticeable, I dunno. :confused: :p

Gee, I've never found you to be condescending. ;)

Gee, I've never found you to be condescending. ;)

Well, ya know, just wanted to check. Last thing I'd want is to interfere with the course of stupidity. :cool:

I've made the argument for years as well. It's almost irrelevant...quite obviously direct experience is a greater tool of knowledge than observation from afar or personal investment with virtually anything, not just entertainment acts. People who argue otherwise, almost invariably are simply venting their frustrations at NOT experiencing it firsthand, and are overcompensating with passion and their right at expressing opinion. And they're entitled. But there are elders in every aspect of societies, cyber or forum or village or corporate or family, that always have to receive their dues, because that's how wheels roll. Yes, some opinions bear more weight than others. Hands-on will always trump dedication. Always.

There are a handful of cats around here (the ones who aren't LYING, which all too often happens, alas) who got to see the Dave era pre-Fair Warning, when Dave was at his peak singing-wise. Guys who saw them open for Sabbath, guys who saw the World Vacation and Invasion tours. I give those guys the respect they've earned 'cause they were there. I've seen every tour since 'Warning, but there are still elders who outweigh me experience-wise. The same older fellas who dragged me against their will to 'Warning at the Forum and the shithole UsFest in Devore, a few of those guys saw VH in Pasadena and Glendale playing backyard parties, or on Sunset just before being discovered. I'll NEVER be able to tell those dudes jack shit about the real nitty gritty of Van Halen, no matter how much a fan I became afterward.


give those guys the respect they've earned?

We're comparing VH fans that saw them live at a given time to WWII vets and cultural elders?

They've "earned" respect by having bought a concert ticket?

I swear, sometimes you guys come up with the most incredibly retarded concepts...

Yeah someone who saw a band "back in the day" has AN experience that someone who didn't doesn't but seriously that experience was as a spectator...not as a participant. Yeah I have been in plenty of audiences and seen some neat things but I hope to god that 30 years from now I'm not pinning my eldership on what tickets I bought...

jeez...that post is the absolute culmination of the macho-rock-concert-goer my-dick-is-bigger-than-yours philosophy.

Trying to frame your argument in the general in order to add some sort of creedence to it just makes you sound overly dramatic...this is a rock group and the type of "experience" your talking about isn't anything close to hands on...it's the type of over-romanticized crap that comes only with a profound LACK of the kind of wisdom and maturity that comes with TRUE elderhood.

flame away if you want...whatever, but wow...I mean that post is just awe-inspiring in its arrogance and stupidity.

I totally get what you're saying about teenagers lecturing a longtime fan about VH or anything else but damn...get a little megalomaniacal and mellow-dramatic sometimes? Even with your humble nod towards those that came before you is just absolutely absurd. If this is the sort of thing that has come define elderhood in our modern society, well, I shudder to think of the future because this is NOT what elderhood is supposed to look like.

Believe me, you're not alone.

For a long time I was a Beatles fanatic. Read every book I could get my hands on, listened to every album non stop, completely immersed myself in them. No matter how much I studied them though, it still isn't the same thing as living through it. It still doesn't change the fact they broke up 8 months before I was born. I would never try to tell somebody who actually lived through that era how it was.

When I see somebody who wasn't even born when DLR was in the band, trying to tell me about VH I can't take it seriously.

I agree with you to an extent with regard to the "bigger than their britches" teen aged fan offering condescending viewpoints to people that have lived and breathed a particular point in time, long before the teen even arrived on the planet. Yet to tell the truth, I stopped my own self conscious moralizing on the subject a while back. The reason being that some particularly snotty reject took issue with me about my own qualifications of offering commentary at this site, mainly because I'd joined in '02 and they'd signed up 2-3 years earlier.

It was at that moment I realized the absolute absurdity of validation through the random cosmic accident of birth. Joining a website at a certain date does not mean that a person is more experienced or worldly in the online era, it merely reflects an unintentional punctuality in the grand (or not so grand) order of things.

Now there are depths to this, different plateaus if you will, regarding life experience and the alleged wisdom gleaned from it. Yes, it's annoying as hell to have some kid lecture a supposed adult about child rearing, yet it is equally condescending (as well as unfair) to be dismissive of the kid for having opinions about what is essentially a bunch of dorks singing and playing guitar.

OK, they never heard of the Yardbirds, nor do they know how Led Zeppelin came about. In fact, Led Zep is merely a name that sits right next to Avenged Sevenfold or My Chemical Romance on a home burned CD because they all happen to sound similar to the kid. He's unaware that at one time no one else sounded like Zep because there is no possible way (at this date) for him to relate to the concept. There are hundreds of thousands of bands out there now, where in the seventies there were merely thousands. (Yeah, my numbers are probably off, yet you get the point.)

So at this point a so called elder must take that into consideration, rather than look back at his own past as being the glory days that today's youth will never appreciate. Rather than being dismissive, it is the responsibility of these "elders' to teach youth of the validity of an artist of yesterday, yet at the same time be willing to recognize that the kid may not be open to the message.

Look, I was damned lucky in my musical upbringing. My brother turned me onto the Beatles and the Stones, while my father brought me into Fats Domino and Ray Charles. While I enjoyed those acts, I still discovered Kiss, Chicago and Sabbath, much to my relatives' chagrin. And ya know what? I liked the fact that my choices annoyed them.

So the next time you read or hear some kid going off about a musical subject that draws your ire, maybe it would be just a little bit prudent to think of yourself at that age. Speaking for myself, the image isn't all that pretty. Yet it surely can be no worse than how a young person feels today.

I agree with you to an extent with regard to the "bigger than their britches" teen aged fan offering condescending viewpoints to people that have lived and breathed a particular point in time, long before the teen even arrived on the planet. Yet to tell the truth, I stopped my own self conscious moralizing on the subject a while back. The reason being that some particularly snotty reject took issue with me about my own qualifications of offering commentary at this site, mainly because I'd joined in '02 and they'd signed up 2-3 years earlier.

It was at that moment I realized the absolute absurdity of validation through the random cosmic accident of birth. Joining a website at a certain date does not mean that a person is more experienced or worldly in the online era, it merely reflects an unintentional punctuality in the grand (or not so grand) order of things.

Now there are depths to this, different plateaus if you will, regarding life experience and the alleged wisdom gleaned from it. Yes, it's annoying as hell to have some kid lecture a supposed adult about child rearing, yet it is equally condescending (as well as unfair) to be dismissive of the kid for having opinions about what is essentially a bunch of dorks singing and playing guitar.

OK, they never heard of the Yardbirds, nor do they know how Led Zeppelin came about. In fact, Led Zep is merely a name that sits right next to Avenged Sevenfold or My Chemical Romance on a home burned CD because they all happen to sound similar to the kid. He's unaware that at one time no one else sounded like Zep because there is no possible way (at this date) for him to relate to the concept. There are hundreds of thousands of bands out there now, where in the seventies there were merely thousands. (Yeah, my numbers are probably off, yet you get the point.)

So at this point a so called elder must take that into consideration, rather than look back at his own past as being the glory days that today's youth will never appreciate. Rather than being dismissive, it is the responsibility of these "elders' to teach youth of the validity of an artist of yesterday, yet at the same time be willing to recognize that the kid may not be open to the message.

Look, I was damned lucky in my musical upbringing. My brother turned me onto the Beatles and the Stones, while my father brought me into Fats Domino and Ray Charles. While I enjoyed those acts, I still discovered Kiss, Chicago and Sabbath, much to my relatives' chagrin. And ya know what? I liked the fact that my choices annoyed them.

So the next time you read or hear some kid going off about a musical subject that draws your ire, maybe it would be just a little bit prudent to think of yourself at that age. Speaking for myself, the image isn't all that pretty. Yet it surely can be no worse than how a young person feels today.

spoken like a TRUE elder. :headbang: :thumb: (there should be one of those "we're not worthy" smileys on here for situations just like this.

So the next time you read or hear some kid going off about a musical subject that draws your ire, maybe it would be just a little bit prudent to think of yourself at that age. Speaking for myself, the image isn't all that pretty. Yet it surely can be no worse than how a young person feels today.

It doesn't draw my ire, it's just not an opinion I can take seriously if it pertains to a time and place that I experienced and they didn't.

Further, I just feel that people who have been following this band share a similar perspective on things. For instance, the debate about whether or not to attend the 2007 tour without Michael Anthony. Somebody who's been following the band a long time and had been waiting 20 plus years for Dave to return is going to offer an opinion that I can repect. Somebody that's been following the band for two years, not so much.

give those guys the respect they've earned?

We're comparing VH fans that saw them live at a given time to WWII vets and cultural elders?

They've "earned" respect by having bought a concert ticket?

I swear, sometimes you guys come up with the most incredibly retarded concepts...

Yeah someone who saw a band "back in the day" has AN experience that someone who didn't doesn't but seriously that experience was as a spectator...not as a participant. Yeah I have been in plenty of audiences and seen some neat things but I hope to god that 30 years from now I'm not pinning my eldership on what tickets I bought...

jeez...that post is the absolute culmination of the macho-rock-concert-goer my-dick-is-bigger-than-yours philosophy.

Trying to frame your argument in the general in order to add some sort of creedence to it just makes you sound overly dramatic...this is a rock group and the type of "experience" your talking about isn't anything close to hands on...it's the type of over-romanticized crap that comes only with a profound LACK of the kind of wisdom and maturity that comes with TRUE elderhood.

flame away if you want...whatever, but wow...I mean that post is just awe-inspiring in its arrogance and stupidity.

I totally get what you're saying about teenagers lecturing a longtime fan about VH or anything else but damn...get a little megalomaniacal and mellow-dramatic sometimes? Even with your humble nod towards those that came before you is just absolutely absurd. If this is the sort of thing that has come define elderhood in our modern society, well, I shudder to think of the future because this is NOT what elderhood is supposed to look like.

LOL. Got agenda?

Shudder away, spud. Doesn't change facts. People who were there, have unique perspectives that people who weren't simply cannot. If you didn't like my presentation or description of a phenomenon you clearly agree with, that's super and kudos to you for expressing your opinion. Sorry you weren't there in person. ;)

Oh, and just to make things easier for ya...my dick is almost certainly bigger than your dick. :D

LOL. Got agenda?

Shudder away, spud. Doesn't change facts. People who were there, have unique perspectives that people who weren't simply cannot. If you didn't like my presentation or description of a phenomenon you clearly agree with, that's super and kudos to you for expressing your opinion. Sorry you weren't there in person. ;)

Oh, and just to make things easier for ya...my dick is almost certainly bigger than your dick. :D

whatever bro. I don't even know what exactly the whole "got agenda" thing is supposed to mean. I most certainly agree that people who "were there" definitely have a perspective that someone who wasn't doesn't and can't have. Is it a more valid opinion? Well that depends but just because someone "was there" doesn't mean they're not full of shit and just because someone "wasn't there" doesn't mean they're some wet-behind-the-ear punk with no valid opinion.

But hey, whatever man, if you have to base your sense of identity and sense of validity by what concerts you saw in person or how "old school" you are then by all means, far be it for me to say otherwise...I just don't need to hang my hat on things like that...and I've never met a true elder that defined his elderhood simply by his age...takes more than a few extra years on a birth certificate to earn that measure of wisdom...and a concert does not a rite of passage mean.

And for the record. There is a big difference between an old guy and elder. Two men of say, 65 years old may have the same number of years worth of experience but that doesn't mean their both elders. A old guy is a guy that has been alive for a while and experienced life. An elder is one who, through his experience and how he processes them, has developed a certain wisdom and perspective through personal growth. Anyone can stand around and watch life...but what you do with those experiences determines whether or not your achieve elderhood.

Anyone can stand around and watch life...but what you do with those experiences determines whether or not your achieve elderhood.

Waldorf: Bravo, bravo!
Statler: Why are you yelling bravo? Did you like it that much?
Waldorf: Nope; friend of mine, Joe Bravo, he's sitting in the front row. Bravo!

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/3244/statlerwaldorfps6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

whatever bro. I don't even know what exactly the whole "got agenda" thing is supposed to mean. I most certainly agree that people who "were there" definitely have a perspective that someone who wasn't doesn't and can't have. Is it a more valid opinion? Well that depends but just because someone "was there" doesn't mean they're not full of shit and just because someone "wasn't there" doesn't mean they're some wet-behind-the-ear punk with no valid opinion.

But hey, whatever man, if you have to base your sense of identity and sense of validity by what concerts you saw in person or how "old school" you are then by all means, far be it for me to say otherwise...I just don't need to hang my hat on things like that...and I've never met a true elder that defined his elderhood simply by his age...takes more than a few extra years on a birth certificate to earn that measure of wisdom...and a concert does not a rite of passage mean.

I said none of those things. You are attributing far more to a post than there actually was to it. Therein lies your agenda. Just like you had to 'back up' your 'bro' in another thread - coinkydink! - where I said something you figured warranted tit for tat.

It's fun to paraphrase inaccurately and out of context, isn't it. :thumb:

And yes, people who were 'there' have more valid opinions about how 'there' was. It's called firsthand experience.

Back to the trenches, rookie. :rolleyes:

And for the record. There is a big difference between an old guy and elder. Two men of say, 65 years old may have the same number of years worth of experience but that doesn't mean their both elders. A old guy is a guy that has been alive for a while and experienced life. An elder is one who, through his experience and how he processes them, has developed a certain wisdom and perspective through personal growth. Anyone can stand around and watch life...but what you do with those experiences determines whether or not your achieve elderhood.

LOL, thanks for the definitions, rookie. Semantics won't change the simple fact that guys who were THERE, have more learned opinions than guys who weren't.

If I could jump in for a second. I think there are really two different parts to the discussion going on. If you have two guys who are 45 years old and one went to a few more concerts than the other but both have followed the band religiously for 30 years, then no, the guy who saw a few more shows doesn't have much more of a valid opinion than the other. Sure, he's got a couple of more shows under his belt but let's not put too much stock in how that translates into him having a more valid opinion. Both guys lived through it and can draw off many an experience of what was going on while it was happening. That's really what matters.


Now the other side is the age thing and that's really where I have a much stronger opinion. I admit I do get a bit put off by a 16 year old or 19 year old who speak all high and mighty with their very strong criticisms. Something about it just rings hollow with me.

Sure, it's a matter of degrees. Everything is when it comes to Van Halen.

But there are greater and lesser degrees, defined by luck (birth), choice (picking VH as a band to see and listen to), and opportunity (how many shows one could and did attend).

Sorry, but the fellas who've seen every tour since '78, have more cred than the rest of us. It's just how it is. The longer you've actively been a part of something, the more you're attuned to it.

This extends to virtually anything in life, not just a stupid rock band.

Sure, it's a matter of degrees. Everything is when it comes to Van Halen.

But there are greater and lesser degrees, defined by luck (birth), choice (picking VH as a band to see and listen to), and opportunity (how many shows one could and did attend).

Sorry, but the fellas who've seen every tour since '78, have more cred than the rest of us. It's just how it is. The longer you've actively been a part of something, the more you're attuned to it.

This extends to virtually anything in life, not just a stupid rock band.

Yet you yourself just said it: It's a matter of degrees. And how one relates through those degrees is ultimately the key, here or anywhere else.

How on Earth does attendance lend credibility, if one only uses that very credibility to exploit things negatively? Telling a kid that his opinion is valueless because he wasn't there diminishes both sides of the argument.

I'm not saying that there are not some young shit-heads out there in need of an intellectual spanking. By the same token, I'm uncertain that lobbing grenades at them by telling them what they might have missed is the correct manner of going about things.

Offering some education via communication would seem to be a starting point, at least to my way of thinking at the moment. Then again, I just might snap at 'em for being wise-assed know it alls. It's a difficult wire to walk, ya know?

Yet you yourself just said it: It's a matter of degrees. And how one relates through those degrees is ultimately the key, here or anywhere else.

How on Earth does attendance lend credibility, if one only uses that very credibility to exploit things negatively? Telling a kid that his opinion is valueless because he wasn't there diminishes both sides of the argument.

I'm not saying that there are not some young shit-heads out there in need of an intellectual spanking. By the same token, I'm uncertain that lobbing grenades at them by telling them what they might have missed is the correct manner of going about things.

Offering some education via communication would seem to be a starting point, at least to my way of thinking at the moment. Then again, I just might snap at 'em for being wise-assed know it alls. It's a difficult wire to walk, ya know?

I merely spoke what is an obvious given. You and I both know I do not use that credibility to exploit unless some squid who's only got bootlegs or personal preference backing them is trying to school me in the Dave era, in which case they reap what they sow. The issue is that people who were NOT there, are put on the defensive because they feel their opinion is being devalidated because of circumstantial structure. The fact is, it's not necessarily that their opinion matters less, it's that others' opinions are backed more heavily by personal hands on experience.

Life ain't fair. I didn't get to see Zeppelin. I don't get to preach to people who did about how great they were back in the day and how much they suck NOW, if said people are offering opinions about the London gig or the Page and Plant tour or whatever might be current 'renditions' to use as comparison.


But hey, none of those lil' darlins have to listen to the likes of my old crotchety rocker-sittin' pipe-smokin' weather-predictin' arthritic-ridden geezin' returnin'-to-the-diaper ass.

Still, that said...guys who saw the boys on Sunset...guys who saw 'em open for Sabbath....those guys carry more water than me. I accept it. I respect it. They earned it.

But hey, none of those lil' darlins have to listen to the likes of my old crotchety rocker-sittin' pipe-smokin' weather-predictin' arthritic-ridden geezin' returnin'-to-the-diaper ass.

Still, that said...guys who saw the boys on Sunset...guys who saw 'em open for Sabbath....those guys carry more water than me. I accept it. I respect it. They earned it.

Precisely, on both counts. The caveat being time, in both instances.

Look...for a minute remove you and me from the argument. In the top paragraph, you mention the youth of today. In the second, the dudes that walked before us. By default, that makes us the middle ground, right?

As such, should we not be a vehicle of conveyance for information between the two halves? I mean study it for a second: Without getting too protracted here, when it comes down to it, all we can do is tell the stories and hope the next generation runs with it. What are we going to do?

Seriously, my dad took one look at the sleeve for Elton John's "Philadelphia Freedom" 45 and singled out the bassist (Dee Murray) as a fag. For one thing, take a good look at the characters in this image of the single, and tell me how my dad picked that guy (upper left) as the homo.

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4664/eltonjohnphiladelphiafrsa7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


Think that stopped me from listening to that tune or Elton John on that day or even to this day?

Look, lecturing people by talking down to them will never work. Yeah, they were not there, yet in the same regard, just because YOU were not there when some random shit happened does not mean that you need hold those that accidentally showed up at the time in any form of reverence because they were old enough to buy tickets.

Come on...I was around when having a telephone in your car meant that it had a fucking rotary dial on it and you needed to talk to an operator to make the connection. Given the perspective...it's more or less like telling your kids that you had to walk to school 4 miles, uphill both ways through the snow, even though you lived in Florida.

Above all, it's music for cryin' out loud. Subjective enough of a subject. If you are happy with what you hear, from any period...who gives a flying crap what anyone else thinks, ya know?

Experience trumps dedication, dude. Like it or lump it.

That's the way the world turns. For everyone.

Am I less of a fan of Led Zep for not getting to see them in their prime than someone who did? Of course not.

But does my opinion of what Led Zep is at its core hold less street cred than someone who vibed and absorbed and lived and breathed the magic, might and power of a live Zeppelin show in person?

Uh...yes.

You can't fault historical logistics for being what they are.

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/4664/eltonjohnphiladelphiafrsa7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)




Clockwise from upper left: Rod Stewart, a young, skinny Ernest Borgnine, the guitarist from Jefferson Starship (Craig something), Phil Collen from Def Leppard, and Tom Hamilton from Aerosmith. A frightening supergroup.

I said none of those things. You are attributing far more to a post than there actually was to it. Therein lies your agenda. Just like you had to 'back up' your 'bro' in another thread - coinkydink! - where I said something you figured warranted tit for tat.

It's fun to paraphrase inaccurately and out of context, isn't it. :thumb:

And yes, people who were 'there' have more valid opinions about how 'there' was. It's called firsthand experience.

Back to the trenches, rookie. :rolleyes:

LOL, thanks for the definitions, rookie. Semantics won't change the simple fact that guys who were THERE, have more learned opinions than guys who weren't.

wow...boy you sure told me. Especially those two "rookie" jabs...man, I think I may have been brought down an entire peg. You really put me in my place. :rolleyes:

Next time you feel the need to jump in and get your licks for kicks, try to not paraphrase out of context. It'll make your point much more interesting. :thumb:

Am I less of a fan of Led Zep for not getting to see them in their prime than someone who did? Of course not.



That's the point I was trying to make.

Just because I didn't see them in '78, doesn't mean I don't know shit about the band. The guy who saw them in '78 probably doesn't know or remember shit about it anyway. Just because you were there, doesn't mean you took it all in. I don't have much experience in seeing VH live, but as I said before, I know my shit and I'll do toe to toe with anyone here. Any era.

By the way, who is this teenager who keeps getting mentioned???

Sure as hell ain't me. I haven't been a teenager for almost 20.

I don't know, you don't seem to.

Care to explain...

Remember, like it or not, NO ONE here knows for sure what happened between VH and Mikey. Everyone here has an opinion but it doesn't make it fact. I posted my opinion about a rumor. Thats all. Doesn't mean I don't know anything about VH.

But then again, why would I give a fuck what you think. You the guy who watches youtube clips and then preaches to everyone who actually went to the shows, who and what was playing bass and backup singing.

According to a lot of the posts about this one, you weren't there, so you dont know fuck all about the 2007/2008 shows, so kindly, shut the fuck up....

That's the point I was trying to make.

Just because I didn't see them in '78, doesn't mean I don't know shit about the band. The guy who saw them in '78 probably doesn't know or remember shit about it anyway. Just because you were there, doesn't mean you took it all in. I don't have much experience in seeing VH live, but as I said before, I know my shit and I'll do toe to toe with anyone here. Any era.

By the way, who is this teenager who keeps getting mentioned???

Sure as hell ain't me. I haven't been a teenager for almost 20.

Nobody said you didn't know shit about the band. You can't go toe to toe about what it was like to be at VH concert in '78 with someone who was there if you weren't there. How hard is this to understand? We were not talking about fandom. We were talking about how some people have weathered the VH storms longer and in more personally experienced ways than others, and how their opinions might warrant more merit than less experienced or younger fans in some ways.

You're missing the point, and are merely hanging up on your defensiveness in that you possibly don't know certain real-time aspects of the Van Halen mythos because of geography, opportunity, or luck. Try to comprehend this relatively simple idiom. You can be a Super VH Fan all you like, and cite every stat in the VH Encyclopedia word for word. You cannot know what some people know, just like they can't know what you know in certain other aspects of the VH sphere. Nobody here in the States can have a better opinion than you, other than fellow Aussies who saw the same tour on your continent, about what it was like to see Gary Cherone front Van Halen in Australia in 1998.

This is not rocket surgery nor a pissing contest. It's just what is.

Care to explain...

Remember, like it or not, NO ONE here knows for sure what happened between VH and Mikey.

Quite the contrary. There are people here who know EXACTLY what happened between Ed and Mike.

Care to explain...

Remember, like it or not, NO ONE here knows for sure what happened between VH and Mikey. Everyone here has an opinion but it doesn't make it fact. I posted my opinion about a rumor. Thats all. Doesn't mean I don't know anything about VH.

But then again, why would I give a fuck what you think. You the guy who watches youtube clips and then preaches to everyone who actually went to the shows, who and what was playing bass and backup singing.

According to a lot of the posts about this one, you weren't there, so you dont know fuck all about the 2007/2008 shows, so kindly, shut the fuck up....




You must've been watching Oprah, you go girl!


You tell the big bad Brett... ;)

Nobody said you didn't know shit about the band. You can't go toe to toe about what it was like to be at VH concert in '78 with someone who was there if you weren't there. How hard is this to understand? We were not talking about fandom. We were talking about how some people have weathered the VH storms longer and in more personally experienced ways than others, and how their opinions might warrant more merit than less experienced or younger fans in some ways.

While I don't flaunt it in my posts (at least I don't think I do), my experience in 1978 skewed my molecules like no other concert experience in my life. Having it happen merely by accident was a bonus. VH wasn't exactly smoking the radio yet by the time I saw them, and we were more interested in the main act, Black Sabbath. In the end, we walked out on Sabbath as they sucked worse than VH did on most of their '04 shows. I some ways, that also skewed my view towards Sabbath as well. Anyway, these guys from this band called Van Halen hit the stage and simply did things I hadn't heard before in ways that were, to be honest, almost alien to my ears. Afterwards, it was nearly impossible to find their debut album anywhere in South Florida (my first copy was 8 track).

While I will always listen to a person of any age with an intelligent perpective of VH, anyone who is a good deal younger than I who voices a point blank opinion on the band's early days and performances, despite not having been there, will always evoke a feeling of 'what the fuck' out of me.

Care to explain...

Remember, like it or not, NO ONE here knows for sure what happened between VH and Mikey. Everyone here has an opinion but it doesn't make it fact. I posted my opinion about a rumor. Thats all. Doesn't mean I don't know anything about VH.

But then again, why would I give a fuck what you think. You the guy who watches youtube clips and then preaches to everyone who actually went to the shows, who and what was playing bass and backup singing.

According to a lot of the posts about this one, you weren't there, so you dont know fuck all about the 2007/2008 shows, so kindly, shut the fuck up....


One of my favorite quotes from people who say that they are 100% SURE that Wolfie was playing bass during their shows:

"I went to the show...and let me just say....WOLFIE WAS PLAYING BASS...I watched every note the kid played....Dave who? Eddie who? I was watching Wolfgang man! That's what I was there to see! I could hear Wolfie so clearly! Especially during the Romeo Delight tapping interlude when nobody else was saying or playing ANYTHING! Awww it was GREAT seeing Wolfie play! And let me say AGAIN....WOLFIE PLAYED EVERY NOTE that came through the speaker......except for Jump which it looked like he wasn't playing


:scared:

One of my favorite quotes from people who say that they are 100% SURE that Wolfie was playing bass during their shows:

"I went to the show...and let me just say....WOLFIE WAS PLAYING BASS...I watched every note the kid played....Dave who? Eddie who? I was watching Wolfgang man! That's what I was there to see! I could hear Wolfie so clearly! Especially during the Romeo Delight tapping interlude when nobody else was saying or playing ANYTHING! Awww it was GREAT seeing Wolfie play! And let me say AGAIN....WOLFIE PLAYED EVERY NOTE that came through the speaker......except for Jump which it looked like he wasn't playing


:scared:
Please tell me thats a joke.

Next time you feel the need to jump in and get your licks for kicks, try to not paraphrase out of context. It'll make your point much more interesting. :thumb:

:thumb: :rolleyes:

Please tell me thats a joke.

:thumb: The fact that your questioning if it is or not mean I have accomplished my mission :p

Yes that quote was an exaggeration...HOWEVER many things that I wrote in there were interspersed with many reviews, in regards to Wolfgang's bass playing, that I read over the course of the tour.


And I just thought of something.

During the whole tour, the band didn't really change the songs AT ALL. Some of the endings were a bit different. But on the whole the songs were exactly how they had been played live in the past or how they were on record (ie. Little Dreamer, Atomic Punk, etc)

Funny how they throw a little bass tapping section in Romeo Delight to showcase Wolfie's bass playing abilities. That's the most I heard his bass all night when I saw them.

That being said, I don't necessarily believe 100% that Wolfie was playing, I also don't believe 100% that he WASN'T playing.

Just something to think about. :thumb:

Funny how they throw a little bass tapping section in Romeo Delight to showcase Wolfie's bass playing abilities. That's the most I heard his bass all night when I saw them.

I'd add the opening to STIL? to that as well. As chef mentioned before though, while he appears to be playing, it certainly was uninspiring playing.

Clockwise from upper left: Rod Stewart, a young, skinny Ernest Borgnine, the guitarist from Jefferson Starship (Craig something), Phil Collen from Def Leppard, and Tom Hamilton from Aerosmith. A frightening supergroup.

Quite frightening, now that you mention it. :eek:

Carry on. Carry on.

EDIT: btw - Craig something is Craig Chaquico (think that's the spelling).

Nonsense. If you were Mike, and your boss never said jack to you about when we were going to tour or record, you'd move on too. What is he supposed to do, sit around and watch the grass grow? He grew tired of the VH Bros inactivity. His thing with Hagar was merely a side project until VH did get something going again. Why is it okay for Ed to go and do side projects like the Starfleet thing with Brian May yrs. ago but it's not okay for Mike to go and play a few dates alongside Hagar? You can't have it both ways. Ed was just plain being a petty little bitch here.

That's becuase Edward (and Alex) are whining little bitches, ESPECIALLY EDWARD, and need a good ass kicking!!! :headbang:

EDIT: btw - Craig something is Craig Chaquico (think that's the spelling).

I know, right? That's why I didn't even attempt it. Thanks.:thumb:

Quite the contrary. There are people here who know EXACTLY what happened between Ed and Mike.

Well, what happened?

Well, what happened?

Ed's a dick. :)

Ed's a dick. :)

And some people say you aren't a poet Squalen.

And some people say you aren't a poet Squalen.

:smokin: