Did Eddie do this,with the future in mind?

**vhwithroth05** · 11.30.06, 04:52 PM

Im sure all u diehard VH fans are aware and love the classic VH background vocals with Mike and Ed. But the noticeable decline of the last couple cd's of the vintage VH backrounds,has me thinking. Do u think Ed did this on purpose,knowing it was a matter of time,before he kicked Mike out? That way,when they got a new bassist,and the background vocals would defintley sound different,but not so drastic,compared to the 1st 8 or 9 cd's? Just a thought?

**ZachenFoot** · 11.30.06, 04:58 PM

Help me out because I'm tired. Is it me, or did that make no sense at all? Seems like something is missing...

**Otis5150** · 11.30.06, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by vhrocks2005

Help me out because I'm tired. Is it me, or did that make no sense at all? Seems like something is missing...

Your not that tired.

**tease** · 11.30.06, 05:06 PM

I thinkwhat he meant was that since VH3 the Background vocals aren't the same and very few are sang by Mike. Most of the VH3 tracks have Ed and Gary and maybe Luke on it, but only two or three songs are with Mike. MWM and CGTSNM and the "new" BOBW tracks also miss Mike high voice.

C'mon, it wasn't that hard to understand!

**Wickett** · 11.30.06, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by vhwithroth05

Im sure all u diehard VH fans are aware and love the classic VH background vocals with Mike and Ed. But the noticeable decline of the last couple cd's of the vintage VH backrounds,has me thinking. Do u think Ed did this on purpose,knowing it was a matter of time,before he kicked Mike out? That way,when they got a new bassist,and the background vocals would defintley sound different,but not so drastic,compared to the 1st 8 or 9 cd's? Just a thought?

Ed made the records he wanted to make, good or bad. Mike's role was diminished, but hardly could be considered a master scheme towards.............. aw screw it, I have no idea what I'm talking about

**DoHalen5150** · 11.30.06, 05:16 PM

If mikey's vocals were still like the cvh, we'd all be bitching that Ed can't move on musically, and continues to make the same music over and over.

But to your original question, I think his role always has been diminished from day one, and during the VH3 years, Ed had different and new ideas he was working on. Mikey probably only stopped by or invited to the studio every now and again. (my opinion)

**vhwithroth05** · 12.01.06, 03:23 AM

Originally Posted by tease

I thinkwhat he meant was that since VH3 the Background vocals aren't the same and very few are sang by Mike. Most of the VH3 tracks have Ed and Gary and maybe Luke on it, but only two or three songs are with Mike. MWM and CGTSNM and the "new" BOBW tracks also miss Mike high voice.

C'mon, it wasn't that hard to understand!

thanks,,,,that's exactly what i meant.

**Simon Ribeiro** · 12.01.06, 05:14 AM

Originally Posted by tease

I think what he meant was that since VH3 the Background vocals aren't the same and very few are sang by Mike. Most of the VH3 tracks have Ed and Gary and maybe Luke on it, but only two or three songs are with Mike. MWM and CGTSNM and the "new" BOBW tracks also miss Mike high voice.

Agreed. And that's sad, 'cos Michael's voice helped out to make =VH= music unique.

**smithjc** · 12.01.06, 11:37 AM

The lack of Mikey on VHIII was likely the basis for the lukewarm reception of said album.

AT · 12.01.06, 01:03 PM

EVH is not that calculated of a person. He's impulsive. So to assume he had any kind of a long-term plan is ridiculous. The man just does what he wants to, when he wants to. It'd be nice if he was better able to manage and own decisions he makes (perhaps then there'd still be a Van Halen the band), but I'm not sure he even gives a shit about his "legacy."

**chefcraig** · 12.01.06, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by AndrewThomas.net

EVH is not that calculated of a person. He's impulsive. So to assume he had any kind of a long-term plan is ridiculous. The man just does what he wants to, when he wants to. It'd be nice if he was better able to manage and own decisions he makes (perhaps then there'd still be a Van Halen the band), but I'm not sure he even gives a shit about his "legacy."

Thank you. For cryin' out loud, folk don't plan their meals that far ahead, let alone their careers. If Ed was that astute, he would not have had to find a cure for cancer, as he would have seen that sucking on metal picks would cause it.

Using that logic, he'd of been able to warn the rest of the planet about using metal forks and spoons, as well.

**Otis5150** · 12.01.06, 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by AndrewThomas.net

EVH is not that calculated of a person. He's impulsive. So to assume he had any kind of a long-term plan is ridiculous. The man just does what he wants to, when he wants to. It'd be nice if he was better able to manage and own decisions he makes (perhaps then there'd still be a Van Halen the band), but I'm not sure he even gives a shit about his "legacy."

Right. Also, it hasn't been much of a "future". 3 new tunes without Mike's vocals since VHIII? Actually, that's just ass-backwards enough to make sense on Ed's planet.

**NOaverageJOE** · 12.01.06, 02:44 PM

I think you guys neglect to remember how much Ed was a part of the backing vocals. Listen to any old bootleg. He had decent pipes back in the day. I think as his voice weakened (smoking and alcohol), he didn't want to do them anymore. On the "Balance" tour, Mike's voice was harmonized live. It is funny how much he took over the backing vocals for VH3, though. I don't really get that one...

**Wickett** · 12.01.06, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by chefcraig

Thank you. For cryin' out loud, folk don't plan their meals that far ahead, let alone their careers. If Ed was that astute, he would not have had to find a cure for cancer, as he would have seen that sucking on metal picks would cause it.

Using that logic, he'd of been able to warn the rest of the planet about using metal forks and spoons, as well.

yeah... that's what I MEANT to say...