• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Does anybody actually like BOTH David Lee Roth/Sammy Hagar?

Turd Ferguson

Turd Ferguson

Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral
So my girlfriend is a big Van Halen fan. And by Van Halen I mean with the lead singer being David Lee Roth. Apparently, she's been a big fan from the beginning and was highly pissed when Roth left and Sammy Hagar joined. About a year ago we watched the Van Halen reunion at Conseco Fieldhouse in Indianapolis, and I posed an interesting question. Now, our seats were pretty decent, but the question I asked was, "Would you see 'Van Hagar' if we were front row (she loves Eddie Van Halen) next to Eddie?" And she still said no.

Now I didn't get into Van Halen until later on. In fact, at first I was a little confused because I didn't know there were two lead singers, but I realized they sounded different. I love songs from both eras. Now I admit they rocked more with David Lee Roth (Runnin' With the Devil is one of my all time favorite songs) and they got a little sappy with Sammy Hagar (Dreams is another favorite of mine).

There's an episode of My Name is Earl that cracks me up when Earl is married to Alyssa Milano and the first sign their marriage is in trouble is when she's putting change in a jukebox and he asks what she's playing. She says Van Halen. He smiles, nods and says David Lee Roth. She gives him the stinkeye and says Sammy Hagar.

Now what I want to know is, am I an anomaly? Can people like BOTH Roth and Hagar?
 
Yes it is possible.

I know because I like both singers as well. Although I hated Van Halen 3. Around that time I lost all respect for Eddie Van Halen. He is a dick for how he treated Sammy, his wife Valerie and Michael Anthony. And given that, it was likely he was a dick to Dave back in 1984 too.

The Roth era definitely rocked hard. But lyrically, it was pretty empty and juvenile. And there wasn't much variance from song to song. But they were together all the way up to the year I graduated high school, so it was a good match and I have been a fan since their first album.

When Hagar joined, it was rocky at first even though they managed to hit #1 as they never had done before. But Hagar really settled in by their third album together. With For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge the band was a well oiled machine.
 
I'm sure some people do, but I am most definitely not one of those people. Love Sammy Hagar, loathe David Lee Roth so so so so sooooo much. I mean, I never was that crazy about his voice - it was OK, but that's about as far as I'll go - and so even that wasn't enough to make up for his "Am I Not the Hottest Thing EVER?" personality. Plus, as Dagman notes, the lyrics were empty.
 
the Dagman said:
Yes it is possible.

I know because I like both singers as well. Although I hated Van Halen 3. Around that time I lost all respect for Eddie Van Halen. He is a dick for how he treated Sammy, his wife Valerie and Michael Anthony. And given that, it was likely he was a dick to Dave back in 1984 too.

The Roth era definitely rocked hard. But lyrically, it was pretty empty and juvenile. And there wasn't much variance from song to song. But they were together all the way up to the year I graduated high school, so it was a good match and I have been a fan since their first album.

When Hagar joined, it was rocky at first even though they managed to hit #1 as they never had done before. But Hagar really settled in by their third album together. With For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge the band was a well oiled machine.
Click to expand...

I'd have to go with Dagman. I've seen Van Halen 4 times, met the band(my step-brothers lived next door to Eddie and Alex when they were teens) and discovered them musically when I was about 15. When Unlawful... came out I realized losing David wasn't a bad thing. Re: Eddie's a dickhead-you got that right, but David was as bad or worse. Frankly, personality-wise only Michael Anthony was worth talking to and he could be a jerk at times as well. Whatever problems they had behind the scene(and, oh boy, I heard some stuff!) it was all problems of their own making. As for the post-Anthony era-that's just not Van Halen.
 
I like both Roth-era VH and Hagar-era VH (or Van Hagar, as the wags in the rock press used to call them). They're almost different bands in some ways, but no more than, say, Ozzy-era Black Sabbath is from the Dio-fronted Sabs or Mark II Deep Purple from Mark III DP. Their voices aren't wildly different (lots of people say that Brian Johnson sounds exactly like Bon Scott, but for my money, they're much less similar to each other than Roth and Hagar are) and Eddie's guitar is immediately recognisable.

For all that, say For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge is different from Van Halen, I think that was the direction they were going in anyway. 1984 saw them going in a poppier direction and 5150 just comtinued to follow the obvious route. Personally, I prefer Roth's Eat 'Em and Smile to 5150, but after Skyscraper he didn't really make much worth listening to, IMHO (though A Little Aint Enough for Me was good).

Personality wise, as far as I can see, Roth, Hagar and Eddie are all arseholes. But frankly, I don't really care. Still, pity they never could get on long enough (any combination of them) to do a decent tour of the UK and Ireland in the last 20 years or so ...
 
Heh - I thought I was one of the only ones. I've seen both Roth and Hagar fronting Van Halen live, and I have all the albums ('cept for VH3 - that doesn't count as a release for me). I really like them both. Slightly different styles, but there is a lot of great Van Halen in both of 'em.

I would really love to get the Guitar Hero: Van Halen game (despite the fact that I don't care for the gameplay relative to Rock Band), but having it just be Dave songs and no Sammy is pretty much a no-sale situation for me.
 
I like both as separate bands. In my mind they will always be too different bands.

Besides differing vocals, the musical styles are just completely different. You could say "they matured as a band" or "they changed with the trends" and that's not it. Eddie plays completely differently, the beats are different.

Seriously, compare "Woman and Children First" to say, "FUCK" or "Balance"

Yes, they both had great songs, and I'm a big fan of both. But they are very different bands.

That being said.... Hot For Teacher
 
I've always been a big, big fan of VH, so count me as another one who likes both Roth and Hagar -- though I do prefer Hagar. Van Roth had an edge and attitude that Van Hagar never had. I see that incarnation of the band as more about the swagger than the craft of music. As a result, I generally select a VH song based on my mood. "Dreams" is still my favorite though.

At this point, I'd actually prefer that VH would release an instrumental-only album. Not gonna happen, but I wouldn't mind just sitting back and listening to that guitar all on its own.

Good stuff, for sure -- no matter how dickish Eddie might be.
 
I like both Sammy Hagar and David Lee Roth. Although David Lee Roth is the better stage performer, and Sammy Hagar is the better musician, both are talented artists who were worthy of being lead vocalists for Van Halen.
 
As someone here once mentioned that when Hagar joined, the VH bros and Michael Anthony just became the world's best back-up band.


There is a lot of stuff I love about the Dave-era and a lot that I love about the Hagar-era. Not much to love about the Cherone-era.
 
I like both. I probably like more of the Roth fronted songs, but I think Hagar is a much better singer.
 
I like most of the Hagar songs a little bit better, simply because the lyrics are just more interesting to me. As Dagman said, the Roth era songs are somewhat too juvenile for my taste.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top