Did anyone else catch this?
Just heard it on KLOS today. One hour interview. The weirdest show. While they were interviewing Sam, they played CVH in the background!! They played "I'll Wait"!
Sam spoke of himself in the third person, which was weird.
Good thing is he didn't spoke ill of the VH 2004 tour. This year on the 06 Sammy tour he said that mike will sing 2 Roth songs (oh let me guess, SGMAD and RWTD).

About the future, he said: "there may be another tour, or there might not be, I don't know."

I thought they would play some other songs from Livin It Up but, no, just "Sam I Am." I was hoping for a good new song that would restore my faith. Wasn't to be. Sigh.

I donno. Someone in the VH universe please do something awesome!

sam still won't acknowledge the cvh material, won't sing any of the dfferent cvh stuff live

geez

He sang Unchained in '04, the show opened with Jump.

Er... it's an ego thing. He has a new song called 'Sam I Am," talks about himself in the third person, etc.

Everyone in this band needs to swallow a big dose of humility be4 making some new music.

He sang Unchained in '04, the show opened with Jump.

sam has been singing jump for years

open it up a bit ya know?

and unchained was an add-in from 98

he sang it before anyways

Again, someone posts something about Sammy (or Roth) and it slowly starts the breaking down into a Sammy vs Dave thing.

Why would or should Sammy acknowledge CVH on his solo tour? The fact that Mike's singing a couple on Sammy's solo show should be something Hagar should be applauded for, he didn't have to do that.

Would anyone expect Dave to acknowledge any Van Halen songs after he left the band on his solo shows? Does anyone think he'd even give fans of the entire Van Halen cataloge any Hagar songs if he were to reuinte with Eddie?

Again, someone posts something about Sammy (or Roth) and it slowly starts the breaking down into a Sammy vs Dave thing.

It's not unusual.

http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/hexenal/tom-jones.jpg

sam still won't acknowledge the cvh material, won't sing any of the dfferent cvh stuff live

geez

Yeah, but could you imagine the collective "WAHHHHHHHHHHHHH" :yell: if Sam did a bunch of CVH on his solo tour? Even with Mikey there, people are gonna bitch about it. Shit, some whiners already have and the tour didn't even start yet.

We'll see what Mikey does during his spots in "The Other Half", maybe he will do more/different CVH songs, we don't know for sure what he's doing yet.

Er... it's an ego thing. He has a new song called 'Sam I Am," talks about himself in the third person, etc.

Everyone in this band needs to swallow a big dose of humility be4 making some new music.

I couldn't have said it any better.

[QUOTE=Little Dreamer]About the future, he said: "there may be another tour, or there might not be, I don't know." QUOTE]

I think after this tour ends they will hit the studio with Eddie.

It takes one call and some apologizing, but I think it will happen.:thumb:

Man, Sammy just can't win with some people.

He sucks 'cause he won't sing CVH... and he sucks 'cause he can't sing CVH like the original singer.

20 years and counting............

Man, Sammy just can't win with some people.

He sucks 'cause he won't sing CVH... and he sucks 'cause he can't sing CVH like the original singer.

20 years and counting............

I've been saying this for years..why should he bother all people are gonna do is bitch..I mean he had the audacity to change the word "back" to "ass" in jump....How does he live with himself?

Again, someone posts something about Sammy (or Roth) and it slowly starts the breaking down into a Sammy vs Dave thing.

Why would or should Sammy acknowledge CVH on his solo tour? The fact that Mike's singing a couple on Sammy's solo show should be something Hagar should be applauded for, he didn't have to do that.

Would anyone expect Dave to acknowledge any Van Halen songs after he left the band on his solo shows? Does anyone think he'd even give fans of the entire Van Halen cataloge any Hagar songs if he were to reuinte with Eddie?

Agreed

Would anyone expect Dave to acknowledge any Van Halen songs after he left the band on his solo shows? Does anyone think he'd even give fans of the entire Van Halen cataloge any Hagar songs if he were to reuinte with Eddie?

I would hope he wouldn't even try. Not a stab at Dave, but I think he's better off leaving the Sammy stuff alone. If, and that's a big IF, Dave and Eddie reunited, I want to hear the Dave stuff with Van Halen. For Van Halen's last hurrah, I would like to see them all stuff their collective egos up their asses, and do it with both Dave and Sammy. It would be cool to get Gary in there too, for that matter.

I would hope he wouldn't even try. Not a stab at Dave, but I think he's better off leaving the Sammy stuff alone. If, and that's a big IF, Dave and Eddie reunited, I want to hear the Dave stuff with Van Halen. For Van Halen's last hurrah, I would like to see them all stuff their collective egos up their asses, and do it with both Dave and Sammy. It would be cool to get Gary in there too, for that matter.

Not a knock on Dave, but I don't think he has the vocal range to pull off some of the Hagar stuff.

However your scenario would be the best for all involved, and would be huge.

Is there Audio of this interview anywhere?

I have a question. Let's say Sammy does sing CVH songs other than Unchained, Jump, you know the usuals. Why would he choose to sing them now with The Other Half and not when he was in VH. Does that mean that he wasn't allowed to sing them by the powers that be, or did he just not want to? HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM........

IMO, Sammy did not want to sing the CVH songs.

Look at what Gary sang when they played during the VH3 tour. Romeo Delight, Feel Your Love Tonight, Dance the Night Away, I'm the One, Unchained and Mean Street.

Then during the soundchecks of the 2004 tour they would play Running with the Devil along with I'm the One.

Played Hot for Teacher a couple of time as well as an intro to the guitar solo.

I think there is sufficient proof that Eddie at least would not have minded playing more CVH tunes on the tour.

someone has to have audio of this..sounds interesting....

I think there is sufficient proof that Eddie at least would not have minded playing more CVH tunes on the tour.

I agree... I think they would have played more if Sammy really wanted to.

As for Gary doing CVH... it's really all they had!!! "3" is not a good live record.. and Gary had a real rough time singing Van Hagar. The CVH really went over well with the crowd.

I agree... I think they would have played more if Sammy really wanted to.

As for Gary doing CVH... it's really all they had!!! "3" is not a good live record.. and Gary had a real rough time singing Van Hagar. The CVH really went over well with the crowd.

I'm sure they would have played more if Sammy had wanted to. However, put yourself in his shoes, if you were in that situation, of course you'd try to get all of your stuff in. As I said before, if VH goes on tour with Roth, I doubt any Hagar songs will be played. At least Sammy would sing four a show (Jump, Panama, Unchained, You Really Got Me) and Mikey singing a 5th (Somebody Get Me A Doctor). Seriously what more do you expect? You do a show where you get in 20 songs at best and at least 1/4 of them are songs that you didn't write or perform orginally. It's an ego thing, but it's also a comfort thing.

Gary's vocals on the Roth songs were really good. He did an excellent job with them. However on the Hagar songs it sounded more like he tried to sing them as Sammy Hagar would and not as Gary Cherone would, so it didn't sound like he was as comfortable.

Last year Sammy didnt sellout tiny Concord pavilion, and he lives nearby. This year he is at Shoreline and ticket sales are slow. If he was with VH, he could have soldout both venues 3 times over in half a day...

Last year Sammy didnt sellout tiny Concord pavilion, and he lives nearby. This year he is at Shoreline and ticket sales are slow. If he was with VH, he could have soldout both venues 3 times over in half a day...

Unless Ticketmaster is having problems, all of the $50 tickets are sold out and close to half of the $20 are gone. If that is correct, that doesn't sound like slow ticket sales.

VH didn't sell out most shows in 2004, so I'm not sure about selling out venues 3 times over in half a day.

I'm sure they would have played more if Sammy had wanted to. However, put yourself in his shoes, if you were in that situation, of course you'd try to get all of your stuff in. As I said before, if VH goes on tour with Roth, I doubt any Hagar songs will be played. At least Sammy would sing four a show (Jump, Panama, Unchained, You Really Got Me) and Mikey singing a 5th (Somebody Get Me A Doctor). Seriously what more do you expect? You do a show where you get in 20 songs at best and at least 1/4 of them are songs that you didn't write or perform orginally. It's an ego thing, but it's also a comfort thing.

Gary's vocals on the Roth songs were really good. He did an excellent job with them. However on the Hagar songs it sounded more like he tried to sing them as Sammy Hagar would and not as Gary Cherone would, so it didn't sound like he was as comfortable.

I have no problem with Sammy not wanting to sing the songs. Personally I think it should have been a Van Hagar concert. Much rather hear 5150, Summer Nights then Panama and Aint Talking Bout Love. (with Sammy singing)

However I think Sammy could do a good job on Dance the Night Away.

I have no problem with Sammy not wanting to sing the songs. Personally I think it should have been a Van Hagar concert. Much rather hear 5150, Summer Nights then Panama and Aint Talking Bout Love. (with Sammy singing)
.


Exactly. Other than the first 5150 tour, when they didn't have a lot of material to work with yet, I wish they'd just left the Dave tunes out entirely, and thusly avoided all the BS on why he doesn't sing 'em, or how he sings 'em badly. And even on the 5150 outing, they might've just played the WHOLE fucking 5150 album, minus Inside, added a few Sam solo/Montrose tunes, and a few covers of Zep, the Who, the Stones, whatever, and it would've been a kick ass 20 song set...heck, their roots were always Cover Band anyway, why not kick out some Kinks, some Doors, some Skynyrd, whatever, and leave the inevitable 'that Jump didn't sound like Dave's Jump' comparisons behind them.

Starting with the OU812 tour, they certainly had enough Sam back log to cut out the Dave era tunes entirely, if they wanted to.

They were damned if they did, damned if they didn't. Tough line to straddle. Sometimes I wonder how Brian Johnson got off easier than Sammy Hagar. I suppose it's at least partly 'cause AC DC didn't add keys or ballads after Bon Scott died.

I agree with the title of this thread. Please keep Sammy off all future records. :sssh:

Man, Sammy just can't win with some people.

He sucks 'cause he won't sing CVH... and he sucks 'cause he can't sing CVH like the original singer.

20 years and counting............

Correct. Sammy has sucked for 20 years and counting.

[QUOTE=Little Dreamer]About the future, he said: "there may be another tour, or there might not be, I don't know." QUOTE]

I think after this tour ends they will hit the studio with Eddie.

It takes one call and some apologizing, but I think it will happen.:thumb:


James my man, I wish I was as optomistic as you....but I hope you are right. :sssh:

[QUOTE=James in New York]


James my man, I wish I was as optomistic as you....but I hope you are right. :sssh:

I am.
;)

Okay who's holdin out here? :D

btw - where's the off the record interview anyways?

It may have been an interview, or it may not have been an interview.

I may show up for work tomorrow. Or I may not.

VH may record again. Or they may not.

:brickwall

Okay who's holdin out here? :D

btw - where's the off the record interview anyways?

It may have been an interview, or it may not have been an interview.

I may show up for work tomorrow. Or I may not.

VH may record again. Or they may not.

:brickwall


Stop throwin' logic at us C!! :D This is VH for Christ sake, logic dosen't work around here!! :brickwall

Sorry bout that. But I'm (as I'm sure everyone else around here is) am sick of the bs answers that don't really answer anything from these guys.

First Mikey, now Sammy. And now and as always, nothing from the bros.

I'M FRICKIN SICK OF IT!!! :yell: :D

And once again, I must ask myself why oh why ever did I get hung up on these guys as my favorite group??? Why couldn't I be a happy U2 fan? :irked:

sam has been singing jump for years

open it up a bit ya know?

and unchained was an add-in from 98

he sang it before anyways

Ah, I see whatcha mean. Yeah....would be nice to hear Sam belt out a little Mean Street or LUTS.

AHEM.......Sooooooo... WHO LISTENED TO THE INTERVIEW???? IS THERE AN EFFING LINK OR WHAT??? :irked:

sam has been singing jump for years

open it up a bit ya know?

and unchained was an add-in from 98

he sang it before anyways

98 :confused: I`m listening to the `93 version from Ny. at the moment and it sounds pretty damn good.

Sorry bout that. But I'm (as I'm sure everyone else around here is) am sick of the bs answers that don't really answer anything from these guys.

First Mikey, now Sammy. And now and as always, nothing from the bros.

I'M FRICKIN SICK OF IT!!! :yell: :D

And once again, I must ask myself why oh why ever did I get hung up on these guys as my favorite group??? Why couldn't I be a happy U2 fan? :irked:


I know, tough life...for a fan anyway. Maybe, just mabye it is this tough, because the music is so good. Maybe we have to pay a price for something that amazing, like when you see the boys walk out onstage, and Ed has that big old smile, and they start the 5150 walk, and the whole freaking arena is going nuts, and you (or me at least) can't get that silly grin off your face because the greatest band in the world is onstage, and you know that maybe there are people out there who cant understand this joy, but...that is their loss....then you say yeah, this is what it is all supposed to be about. It is that good isn't it?? :)

AHEM.......Sooooooo... WHO LISTENED TO THE INTERVIEW???? IS THERE AN EFFING LINK OR WHAT??? :irked:

..http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d120/craigstacey/466863408-Spaceballs.jpg

In this interview, Sam said that the reason he had problems singing CVH songs during his time in the band is that he couldn't get behind the lyrics.

For me the problem I've had is not the songs that Sam played, but the ones he left out. Not playing "Little Guitars," for example. A crime!
No Mean Streets, no Here About It Later.
Sam's excuses were always BS. He put a cover of Bob Dylan on his new CD, so we know he does covers, sing other ppl's lyrics.

It's an EGO thing. Look at "Here About It Later." It's about some dude trying to get some action from some chick (at least that's the way i would sell it to Sammy). The lyrics are TOTALLY down Sam's alley.
What about "Drop Dead Legs" - hey sam, it's about a girl, she's got really nice legs! It's not like we're asking Sam to sing Leonard Cohen or Slayer lyrics!

That's what gets me mad. BS excuse that have deprived us loyal fans of awesome live music.

..http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d120/craigstacey/466863408-Spaceballs.jpg

Nice. :thumb:

In this interview, Sam said that the reason he had problems singing CVH songs during his time in the band is that he couldn't get behind the lyrics.

For me the problem I've had is not the songs that Sam played, but the ones he left out. Not playing "Little Guitars," for example. A crime!
No Mean Streets, no Here About It Later.
Sam's excuses were always BS. He put a cover of Bob Dylan on his new CD, so we know he does covers, sing other ppl's lyrics.

It's an EGO thing. Look at "Here About It Later." It's about some dude trying to get some action from some chick (at least that's the way i would sell it to Sammy). The lyrics are TOTALLY down Sam's alley.
What about "Drop Dead Legs" - hey sam, it's about a girl, she's got really nice legs! It's not like we're asking Sam to sing Leonard Cohen or Slayer lyrics!

That's what gets me mad. BS excuse that have deprived us loyal fans of awesome live music.

Again I ask, why should he have to play songs that either he doesn't feel or possibly doesn't even like? (How could you not like them, but still.)

I'm sure ego has something to do with it, so does professional pride. Give him a break in a 20 song show, 1/4 of the songs they played each show in 2004 were songs he didn't write. Why is it such a big deal? It would be different if VH had only done one or two albums and 20 songs overall with Sammy, but they did four albums and over 50 songs with him.

As i said before, it's not like Dave would ever play a Sammy song live.

Ed & Alex could have laid the law down to him and made him play those awesome songs and not "deprive" us loyal fans, but they didn't. I don't see it as being a big deal. I'm sorry that you do.

Because it's part of the job of being VH's singer to respect the legacy of the band.

You gotta forget about the whole VH drama for a bit and see what is the standard practice in other bands.

Brian Johnson: no problems singing any Bon Scott songs.
Phil Collins: no problem singing any Peter Gabriel songs
Steve Hogarth (Marillion): no problem singing any Fish songs
Ronnie James Dio: no problem singing Ozzy songs live when in Sabbath.

Should I go on?

I understand maybe for the 1986 tour, in the middle of all the war of words. But in 2004, it was friggin 18 YEARS LATER, FOR CHRISSAKES!!! Sam didn't learn any new VH songs for that tour. EVH and AVH started 'Hot For Teacher" and then had to stop when the singing comes in! Talk about the most ridiculous thing I ever saw live!

Maybe it's not only Sam's fault, maybe it's everyone's fault, maybe it's our fault, having dramatized everything for all those years.
It's just a SAD situation!

http://usera.imagecave.com/LLFHS/SvD.jpg283476238746

LOL...haha.....
Now , THAT is classic.....

Because it's part of the job of being VH's singer to respect the legacy of the band.

Hit the nail on the head!

Ed once said described Sammy's refusal to acknowledge more of the Roth material in sets as, "His biggest mistake."

Van Halen lost alot of fans for this reason.

Umm, I'm still here. :confused:

Nice pics you guys. They's be keepas. :thumb:

http://usera.imagecave.com/LLFHS/SvD.jpg283476238746


Okay this one's so good it deserves a repeat. :thumb:

..http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d120/craigstacey/466863408-Spaceballs.jpg

So does this one. :thumb:

You think we're bein too literal?? :D

Because it's part of the job of being VH's singer to respect the legacy of the band.

You gotta forget about the whole VH drama for a bit and see what is the standard practice in other bands.

Brian Johnson: no problems singing any Bon Scott songs.
Phil Collins: no problem singing any Peter Gabriel songs
Steve Hogarth (Marillion): no problem singing any Fish songs
Ronnie James Dio: no problem singing Ozzy songs live when in Sabbath.

Should I go on?

I understand maybe for the 1986 tour, in the middle of all the war of words. But in 2004, it was friggin 18 YEARS LATER, FOR CHRISSAKES!!! Sam didn't learn any new VH songs for that tour. EVH and AVH started 'Hot For Teacher" and then had to stop when the singing comes in! Talk about the most ridiculous thing I ever saw live!

Maybe it's not only Sam's fault, maybe it's everyone's fault, maybe it's our fault, having dramatized everything for all those years.
It's just a SAD situation!

I see your point, and I actually agree that it would have been nice for Sammy to sing more Roth songs. However there are 4 guys in the band, the other 3 could have said "do these songs or get out". I know in 98 they let Gary chose the set list. (Or at least publicly stated that he picked the songs.) Sammy & Dave are polar opposites in many ways, including lyric style and song structure. Maybe Sammy just didn't feel the lyrics on many of the CVH stuff.

However to argue it, Brian Johnson doesn't do nearly as many Bon Scott songs as most people think he should either. Phil Collins did mainly his Genisis pop hit songs after awhile as well. Dio had to do the Ozzy songs, as they were pretty much the only songs the audience was familiar with. 99% of Sabbath's hits were Ozzy songs.

Actually I think it made more sense to do more Roth songs in 1986 when the band only had 9 songs with Hagar to play instead of doing Can't drive 55, & Only One Way To Rock from Hagar's solo career than it makes sense in 2006 to do more.

Again, I ask, does anyone expect Dave to "respect the legacy of the band" and sing half a set of Hagar songs (or even 1/4 of the set like Sammy does?) if he was ever back in the band?

Again, I ask, does anyone expect Dave to "respect the legacy of the band" and sing half a set of Hagar songs (or even 1/4 of the set like Sammy does?) if he was ever back in the band?

He wouldn't sing any (not that he'd be able to pull them off) but honestly, no one wants Dave singing Sammy songs anyway. We haven't heard the old stuff in so long, I'd be pissed if they did get back together and Dave's up there trying to sing Dreams :wtf: No thanks, stick to the sixpack please.

But of course Dave wouldn't get any of the "respecting the legacy" criticism because that only applies to any singer but Dave when it comes to Van Halen.

Convenient how that works out ain't it? :)

Well the Diamond One was there from the beginning.

(don't hurt me) :sssh:

if there's a reunion w/ dave the whole set better be CVH tunes....

if there's a reunion w/ dave the whole set better be CVH tunes....

Then people of that mindset shouldn't be upset if Sammy doesn't play any CVH songs.

Then people of that mindset shouldn't be upset if Sammy doesn't play any CVH songs.

if VH had zero succes w/ DLR then that may be true...but VH was the biggest band on the planet with DLR and EVH was the biggest guitar player on earth during those years...denying that legacy would be retarded...

the opposite doesn't apply....

I know in 98 they let Gary chose the set list. (Or at least publicly stated that he picked the songs.)

LOL, no, the latter may be true, the former certainly is not.

if VH had zero succes w/ DLR then that may be true...but VH was the biggest band on the planet with DLR and EVH was the biggest guitar player on earth during those years...denying that legacy would be retarded...

the opposite doesn't apply....

And yet, when Sam did sing the songs, he was raked through the coals anyway.

BTW, stating VH was the biggest band on the planet is stretching a bit. One of the leading hard rock acts circa 1982-1984, yes. The rest of it, competing with the likes of various New Wave artists, U2, Bon Jovi, Aerosmith, AC DC, and so on, they were one among many.

Dave and Ed aren't gods. They're just musicians, who we on this board still somewhat revere (that said, with each passing day and each new backbiting clusterfuck, they seem to lose more and more cred, LOL). Not many outside these forums and websites care anymore, and haven't for a long time.

Well the Diamond One was there from the beginning.

(don't hurt me) :sssh:

And?

He walked away from the legacy and Ed went forward and had a hell of a run with Sammy. If people cry about Sammy not doing Dave songs because of "respect to the legacy", then I expect them to cry if Dave doesn't do Sammy tunes.

But they won't because it's not about "the legacy" to them, it's about Dave or just the dislike for Sammy. And that's fine, but it's hypocritical to slag on Sammy for it and use "the legacy" as an excuse. They cry when Sam sings CVH, they cry because it's not enough, wahhhhhhhhhh. :rolleyes:

The whole thing is silly, no one is ever happy. The band, the fans, the critics nothing but criticism and complaints. Music SHOULD be fun.

Personally, I'd rather have a full Van Hagar set if Sammy's in the band. No complaints here. Same goes for Dave.

And yet, when Sam did sing the songs, he was raked through the coals anyway.

BTW, stating VH was the biggest band on the planet is stretching a bit. One of the leading hard rock acts circa 1982-1984, yes. The rest of it, competing with the likes of various New Wave artists, U2, Bon Jovi, Aerosmith, AC DC, and so on, they were one among many.

Dave and Ed aren't gods. They're just musicians, who we on this board still somewhat revere (that said, with each passing day and each new backbiting clusterfuck, they seem to lose more and more cred, LOL). Not many outside these forums and websites care anymore, and haven't for a long time.

the time period i'm talking about is early 80s...say 81-85

aerosmith was nobody in the 80s...especially around 1984...that was when they did the back in the saddle tour with the original members...putting them in VH's league in that time frame is wrong

bon jovi was opening for band's in 1984/1985

u2 - joshua tree wasn't released until 1986...maybe the only band that could've been up there in VHs stature...i may give you this one...

ac/dc...nope not as big as VH in the 80s

Just be grateful for getting music and a tour.

Period.

if VH had zero succes w/ DLR then that may be true...but VH was the biggest band on the planet with DLR and EVH was the biggest guitar player on earth during those years...denying that legacy would be retarded...

the opposite doesn't apply....

I'm a fan of all era's of Van Halen....

VH was huge with Roth, they were huge with Hagar. It wasn't like there was a big dropoff in their popularity with the change over in singers. As far as being the biggest band on the planet, maybe for awhile in 1984 but overall from 78-84 I don't think they were consistantly the "biggest band on the planet".

But denying the legacy of many sold out shows world wide, 4 # 1 albums and several big hits from 86-95 would also be retarted. If Roth goes on tour suddenly your logic doesn't apply, does it? I mean, it's all about who's "side" in the argument you support, all other arguments are invalid, right?

the time period i'm talking about is early 80s...say 81-85

aerosmith was nobody in the 80s...especially around 1984...that was when they did the back in the saddle tour with the original members...putting them in VH's league in that time frame is wrong

bon jovi was opening for band's in 1984/1985

u2 - joshua tree wasn't released until 1986...maybe the only band that could've been up there in VHs stature...i may give you this one...

ac/dc...nope not as big as VH in the 80s

Journey was huge during this time, as was Boston. The Clash was huge in the early 80s, so was Queen (mostly in Europe where VH wasn't big at all) & the Stones. Unfortunately all the new wave bands were huge as well. I agree Van Halen was the best, but probably only the biggest in 1984 alone. (The only people in music that could touch them in 1984 were Prince and Michael Jackson.)

He sang Unchained in '04, the show opened with Jump.

I witnessed Unchained live in Houston on the 93 tour.

the time period i'm talking about is early 80s...say 81-85

aerosmith was nobody in the 80s...especially around 1984...that was when they did the back in the saddle tour with the original members...putting them in VH's league in that time frame is wrong

bon jovi was opening for band's in 1984/1985

u2 - joshua tree wasn't released until 1986...maybe the only band that could've been up there in VHs stature...i may give you this one...

ac/dc...nope not as big as VH in the 80s

(snicker)

Aerosmith was nobody in the 80s? Yeah....um, ok.

U2 was big before JT. Unforgettable Fire. Boy. War. Maybe not for you.

Claiming AC DC wasn't as big as VH is ridiculous. They were bigger. In the real global world, AC DC was huge, much, much bigger than VH in terms of arena rock...perhaps not as much MTV video Dave TV exposure, but that didn't mean jack shit to classic hard rock fans both European, Australian, and American, as was evidenced by, oh, I dunno, ticket sales, a blistering tour de force tried and true hallmark album that stands the test of time over virtually all other hard rock LPs, as well as the fact that Dave era Van Halen opened for them at the European Monsters of Rock fest in 1984 at the PEAK of VH's greatness. I daresay even if they'd held the festival here in the States, there's no fucking way AC DC would've been anything other than lead bill, even in 1984, and Edward's gone on record plenty of times stating his admiration and reverence for Angus.

And I'm no hardcore Acca Dacca fan. But I know what was goin' on back then. Great, you think Dave era VH beats all. Original and innovative. I too am a hardcore VH fan both classic and Hagar. But there's individual opinion, and there's mass appeal, and facts are facts...more people knew the words to Hell's Bells than Girl Gone Bad. AC DC also had a major chick factor goin for them...for some reason, the boys from down under's tunes resonate with those of the fairer sex, in my experience (I've attended 5 AC DC shows on various tours). Objectivity works when applied appropriately, honest.

Fookin A. :)

VH was on top of the world in 1984 but that was about it.

U2 was not on top until the Joshua Tree. At that time they were an alternative band and back then, alternative meant that you did not get played on mainstream radio. Therefore you did not sell multiplatinum albums.

Aerosmith made a splash in 1987. Done with Mirrors was a flop. Whatever album was released in 87 (with Dude Looks Like a Lady) got them back. Pump made them larger but that was in 89 or so.

Bon Jovi was nothing till 1986 because that is when Slippery When Wet came out. They had one minor hit Runaway prior to that.

Guns N Roses owned from 1988 on.

Anyway hair metal really took off after Slippery When Wet. When you look at the releases from the 80's anything prior to 1986 really does not fit with that era. Production is different too.

U2 was not on top until the Joshua Tree. At that time they were an alternative band and back then, alternative meant that you did not get played on mainstream radio. Therefore you did not sell multiplatinum albums.




That's in the US, the original mention was biggest band on the planet. U2 had a good following in the US and were huge in Europe from the time of their 1st album. They didn't become monsters in the US until the Joshua Tree, however the US isn't the whole world.

(snicker)

Aerosmith was nobody in the 80s? Yeah....um, ok.

U2 was big before JT. Unforgettable Fire. Boy. War. Maybe not for you.

Claiming AC DC wasn't as big as VH is ridiculous. They were bigger. In the real global world, AC DC was huge, much, much bigger than VH in terms of arena rock...perhaps not as much MTV video Dave TV exposure, but that didn't mean jack shit to classic hard rock fans both European, Australian, and American, as was evidenced by, oh, I dunno, ticket sales, a blistering tour de force tried and true hallmark album that stands the test of time over virtually all other hard rock LPs, as well as the fact that Dave era Van Halen opened for them at the European Monsters of Rock fest in 1984 at the PEAK of VH's greatness. I daresay even if they'd held the festival here in the States, there's no fucking way AC DC would've been anything other than lead bill, even in 1984, and Edward's gone on record plenty of times stating his admiration and reverence for Angus.

And I'm no hardcore Acca Dacca fan. But I know what was goin' on back then. Great, you think Dave era VH beats all. Original and innovative. I too am a hardcore VH fan both classic and Hagar. But there's individual opinion, and there's mass appeal, and facts are facts...more people knew the words to Hell's Bells than Girl Gone Bad. AC DC also had a major chick factor goin for them...for some reason, the boys from down under's tunes resonate with those of the fairer sex, in my experience (I've attended 5 AC DC shows on various tours). Objectivity works when applied appropriately, honest.

Fookin A. :)

dude..you're clearly delusional...aerosmith had trouble filling arenas in 1985 with that reunion thing they had...not until 1986 w/ desmond child writing half the tunes did they get any "hits"

yes..u2 was big w/ unforgettable fire but not "VH big"...come on bro...

and claiming that ac/dc was as big as VH is ridiculous....

(snicker)

And I'm no hardcore Acca Dacca fan. But I know what was goin' on back then. Great, you think Dave era VH beats all. Original and innovative. I too am a hardcore VH fan both classic and Hagar. But there's individual opinion, and there's mass appeal, and facts are facts...more people knew the words to Hell's Bells than Girl Gone Bad. AC DC also had a major chick factor goin for them...for some reason, the boys from down under's tunes resonate with those of the fairer sex, in my experience (I've attended 5 AC DC shows on various tours). Objectivity works when applied appropriately, honest.

Fookin A. :)


also, great argument here...pick a well known ac/dc song and an obscure VH song...how about hell's bells versus jump....

objectivity is a 2 way street

and claiming that ac/dc was as big as VH is ridiculous....


I claimed they were bigger, actually.

You obviously either lived in a commune or didn't attend a lot of arena rock shows. I cannot say the same. I know what I heard and saw, and what the general populace thought both of Back in Black and 1984. I grew up in the heart of 80s hard rock. There was a hierarchy, to those in the know, and sure, while VH was my personal favorite, there was no denying the few royal icons above them in the genre as far as overall appeal to the rest of the world OUTSIDE the diehard Van Halen fan circles...which included AC DC. Ed himself stated as such, not sure why you think you're more on top of it than the man himself.

Unfortunately, as much as many here would like to believe, VH never ever ruled the planet. At the Us Fest, people were just as stoked to see Priest and Ozzy as they were Van Halen, more so even, as it was earlier in the day and everybody wasn't as burnt as they were when Halen finally came on - and put on a less than spectacular performance to boot.

I think the only bands to really ever lord over all that was rock during their respective tenures were the Beatles and Led Zeppelin, maybe the Stones to a lesser degree. Everybody else, fell into particular niches. Van Halen was one of those too. One of the best ones, naturally.

But world wide appeal and longevity - AC/DC and VH, there's no contest.

Now if Dave had stayed and we'd had ten more albums from them, and they'd stayed together and still be cutting albums to this day? That might be another story.

You think everything is less than Edward, you've made that perfectly clear in all your posts, including the other band members in Van Halen. I'm the most diehard VH fan you'd ever meet, but I can acknowledge those who exceeded their popularity in terms of mass appeal.

As far as obscurity versus hit singles, I can clarify my comparison, since you're wanking about it...yep, more people know You Shook Me All Night Long over Jump, and more people know The Jack over In a Simple Rhyme. See, that ain't so hard.

Take it easy, dude. Van Halen rawks balls. We know this. Giving credit where it's due doesn't take anything away from them.

In 1980 AC/DC released BIB and was clearly bigger than VH everywhere. By 1983 -85, during their "Flick of the Switch"/"Fly on the Wall" era, their popularity and record sales started going down a bit.
In 1984-85, VH had a diamond album. So they were selling more than AC/DC and Def Leppard, the biggest hard rock acts at the time. In 1986, I'd say 5150 also probably dominated the hard rock genre in terms of record sales. However by 1987 Def Leppard released Hysteria.
So you could say that VH was the biggest band on the land for 3 years. But 3 years only.
AC/DC, however, has been bigger than VH for a longer period of time, I would think. They've been selling out stadiums in Europe since the 80s all the way to the 2000s. VH never sold out a stadium tour on their own name in Europe - except maybe for the odd show at Wembley.

I'm not gonna be cruel and mention the fact that AC/DC is releasing a new album soon and compare it to the current state of VH...

Who really gives a shit about AC-DC? Loved Back in Black. But most of their songs sound the same.

In this interview, Sam said that the reason he had problems singing CVH songs during his time in the band is that he couldn't get behind the lyrics.

For me the problem I've had is not the songs that Sam played, but the ones he left out. Not playing "Little Guitars," for example. A crime!
No Mean Streets, no Here About It Later.
Sam's excuses were always BS. He put a cover of Bob Dylan on his new CD, so we know he does covers, sing other ppl's lyrics.

It's an EGO thing. Look at "Here About It Later." It's about some dude trying to get some action from some chick (at least that's the way i would sell it to Sammy). The lyrics are TOTALLY down Sam's alley.
What about "Drop Dead Legs" - hey sam, it's about a girl, she's got really nice legs! It's not like we're asking Sam to sing Leonard Cohen or Slayer lyrics!

That's what gets me mad. BS excuse that have deprived us loyal fans of awesome live music.


I understand why he didn't want to play them when it actually mattered, but to throw them out there now is no more than another FU to the sisters. However, I do hope MA palys more than 2 cvh tunes because you take what you can get. If only we can get MA to join the Punks we'd be all set. $10 tickets would rule!

I claimed they were bigger, actually.

You obviously either lived in a commune or didn't attend a lot of arena rock shows. I cannot say the same. I know what I heard and saw, and what the general populace thought both of Back in Black and 1984. I grew up in the heart of 80s hard rock. There was a hierarchy, to those in the know, and sure, while VH was my personal favorite, there was no denying the few royal icons above them in the genre as far as overall appeal to the rest of the world OUTSIDE the diehard Van Halen fan circles...which included AC DC. Ed himself stated as such, not sure why you think you're more on top of it than the man himself.

Unfortunately, as much as many here would like to believe, VH never ever ruled the planet. At the Us Fest, people were just as stoked to see Priest and Ozzy as they were Van Halen, more so even, as it was earlier in the day and everybody wasn't as burnt as they were when Halen finally came on - and put on a less than spectacular performance to boot.

I think the only bands to really ever lord over all that was rock during their respective tenures were the Beatles and Led Zeppelin, maybe the Stones to a lesser degree. Everybody else, fell into particular niches. Van Halen was one of those too. One of the best ones, naturally.

But world wide appeal and longevity - AC/DC and VH, there's no contest.

Now if Dave had stayed and we'd had ten more albums from them, and they'd stayed together and still be cutting albums to this day? That might be another story.

You think everything is less than Edward, you've made that perfectly clear in all your posts, including the other band members in Van Halen. I'm the most diehard VH fan you'd ever meet, but I can acknowledge those who exceeded their popularity in terms of mass appeal.

As far as obscurity versus hit singles, I can clarify my comparison, since you're wanking about it...yep, more people know You Shook Me All Night Long over Jump, and more people know The Jack over In a Simple Rhyme. See, that ain't so hard.

Take it easy, dude. Van Halen rawks balls. We know this. Giving credit where it's due doesn't take anything away from them.

great thesis...you proved your point...you're the world's authority on rock...i stand corrected...

nevermind that during the 80s ac/dc had their worst selling albums to date...stick by the old standard back in black...no kidding that's one of the greatest selling albums in history...wow, going out on a ledge there dude...what about everything else that was released in the 80s..."flick of the switch"?

[QUOTE=the_atomic_punks_rule]I understand why he didn't want to play them when it actually mattered, but to throw them out there now is no more than another FU to the sisters. QUOTE]

You may be right, but it's not like he's going to be singing on them.

great thesis...you proved your point...you're the world's authority on rock...i stand corrected...

nevermind that during the 80s ac/dc had their worst selling albums to date...stick by the old standard back in black...no kidding that's one of the greatest selling albums in history...wow, going out on a ledge there dude...what about everything else that was released in the 80s..."flick of the switch"?

:)

Know who else was HUGE in 1984?

Huey Lewis and the News.
Prince.
The Police.
Madonna.
Michael Jackson.
Duran Duran.
Genesis.

Van Halen had three top 40 hit singles that year. Sammy Hagar had two. So did the Cars. Frickin' Spandau Ballet had one. AC DC had ZERO.

Point was, there are hard rock entities with greater, widespread appeal than Van Halen, always has been. People were chanting for Angus long before Eddie, and long after.

In the hard rock lexicon, it's generally accepted by critics and aficionados of classic hard rock that AC/DC ranks higher on the popularity scale. It doesn't matter if it stems from one album or ten. One might argue Van Halen truly only reached its zenith and pop culture rank via 4 albums, out of 14....VH 1, 1984, 5150, and FUCK. Highway to Hell and Back and Black may define the same for AC DC, but that doesn't change numbers of concert attendees nor which band is played more in the general populace's stereos. (exempting, naturally , the hardcore VH fans like all of us here).

But hey, I'm not trying to convince you. Just trying to be objective.

Do I think AC/DC is better than Van Halen? Hell no.

Do I think the rest of the world respects and plays AC/DC more than Van Halen? Yes.

:)

Know who else was HUGE in 1984?

Huey Lewis and the News.
Prince.
The Police.
Madonna.
Michael Jackson.
Duran Duran.
Genesis.

Van Halen had three top 40 hit singles that year. Sammy Hagar had two. So did the Cars. Frickin' Spandau Ballet had one. AC DC had ZERO.

Point was, there are hard rock entities with greater, widespread appeal than Van Halen, always has been. People were chanting for Angus long before Eddie, and long after.

In the hard rock lexicon, it's generally accepted by critics and aficionados of classic hard rock that AC/DC ranks higher on the popularity scale. It doesn't matter if it stems from one album or ten. One might argue Van Halen truly only reached its zenith and pop culture rank via 4 albums, out of 14....VH 1, 1984, 5150, and FUCK. Highway to Hell and Back and Black may define the same for AC DC, but that doesn't change numbers of concert attendees nor which band is played more in the general populace's stereos. (exempting, naturally , the hardcore VH fans like all of us here).

But hey, I'm not trying to convince you. Just trying to be objective.

Do I think AC/DC is better than Van Halen? Hell no.

Do I think the rest of the world respects and plays AC/DC more than Van Halen? Yes.


ok...truce...i agree with ya...worldwide ac/dc is/was more popular

I will move this to the Red Rocker forum.