xxx
2012-02-21 05:56:53 UTC
i typed out my initial thoughts for some friends, so i thought i'd
share with the group. once i processed it more, i liked the album a
lot more and i'll post another thread of individual album thoughts
which i'm sure comes off better than this thread might, so take that
into consideration before jumping all over this thread.
about 5 of the 13 songs are from old demos, so the album doesn't
really sound "new", which kind of sucks, in that you're hoping for
something completely fresh that you haven't heard before. also, the
old songs in a way are re-treads of songs that weren't good enough to
make the cut on the old albums in the first place...but they're good
enough now?? they've had 14 yrs of zilch but still had to go back to
the well for 5 of 13 songs? that's kind of weak, imo, especially since
eddie's been bragging that he has "10 albums worth of new material"
for the past decade.
the overall vibe of the album feels most like VH II and women and
children first upon my first few listens. but chuck klosterman of
grantland.com had a curious observation- that many of the songs sound
like they could've been on some of dave's past solo albums...and i
actually found that to be true once i listened several times. some of
them could've been on the eat em and smile, skyscraper, a little ain't
enough or DLR band albums.
the album sounded a little "off" to me and/or that something was
missing. once i realized a lot of this sounded like songs from dave's
past solo albums, it hit me what was missing...mike's harmonies. the
songs still have harmonies but it's not the signature VH sound that
mike brought to the band. i've been saying for awhile that as much as
ed's guitar and dave's frontman abilities set VH apart, so did mike's
harmonies. bands like ac/dc, aerosmith, led zep. etc...they didn't
have those kind of harmonies like VH did. it gave them a bit more pop
appeal and sing-along factor, while still rocking your socks off.
using a lot of old songs that were written when they were in their
early 20s and now playing them as they're pushing 60...feels weird.
it's hard and thrashy but it's like an old guy who marries a trophy
wife who's young enough to be his daughter- yeah, she's nice arm candy
and all...but you're old enough to be her dad and it just looks...off.
also, going from 1984 to 2012 between van roth albums (well, they had
those 2 songs in '96) is a HUGE gap. you can't have nearly 30 missing
yrs and not have all those yrs of musical transition and have it feel
right. they were about 30 when they broke up and nearly 60 now and
it's hard not to notice but it's like they're hoping you think it's
still the 1980s...but all those yrs are just...missing. you can't not
notice.
i also wonder if they considered ted templeman as producer for this
one. he's probably retired or semi-retired by now but he did do ALL
six van roth albums (and 1 van hagar album). he must know them as well
as anyone. i just wondered if it was considered...and if ted would've
taken them up on the offer, if asked. i wonder how different the album
would've sounded.
eddie sounds like he's regained his chops, which is a relief. both he
and al were surprisingly rusty on both reunion tours ('04 w/hagar and
'07 w/roth). klosterman said in his review that eddie seemed out to
prove he was still godzilla on guitar. he's right- ed's out to scorch
the earth once again.
and speaking of bass, i still haven't heard or seen what makes wolfie
any sort of musical prodigy. first off, i wonder how he really feels
about playing with a bunch of old dudes that are 40 yrs older than he
is. and what kid *really* wants to play with his old man?? most kids
his age wouldn't want to play classic rock oldies, much less play with
their old man.
you'd think he'd rather play with kids his own age and play modern
music. i always felt that if ed *had* to have his kid in the band, it
should've been as a 2nd guitarist or on keyboards during the keyboard
songs. that way they could've kept mike in the band. the way they gave
mike the heave-ho after all those yrs of being a loyal soldier was
really, really wrong, petty and vindictive.
chuck kosterman also had a comment that went something like, he has a
hard time telling if it's an album he really likes but doesn't want to
or if it's an album he really doesn't like but wants to. i kind of
realize what he means now. i do like it...but it's not totally a VH
album. it's kind of a dave album that eddie played on or something to
that effect. there are so many factors (the time gap from 1984, using
old songs, mike's harmonies missing) that it messes with your head and
being to judge it as a VH album.
i wonder if and when we'll get another album out of them or if dave
will rub the van 3 stooges clan wrong and they'll go back to sammy.
from the stuff i've seen of them together so far, it looks like
they're trying to make it work but there still seems to be awkward
moments. dave's dialed it back but can still rub nerves with the
forced jokes/laughs and perma-grin and the van halens are uber-flakes,
so it can blow up at any moment. when they were with sam it seemed
like 4 friends goofing off and having a blast onstage (outside of
maybe the '04 tour). with dave, it still seems more business than
pleasure.
share with the group. once i processed it more, i liked the album a
lot more and i'll post another thread of individual album thoughts
which i'm sure comes off better than this thread might, so take that
into consideration before jumping all over this thread.
about 5 of the 13 songs are from old demos, so the album doesn't
really sound "new", which kind of sucks, in that you're hoping for
something completely fresh that you haven't heard before. also, the
old songs in a way are re-treads of songs that weren't good enough to
make the cut on the old albums in the first place...but they're good
enough now?? they've had 14 yrs of zilch but still had to go back to
the well for 5 of 13 songs? that's kind of weak, imo, especially since
eddie's been bragging that he has "10 albums worth of new material"
for the past decade.
the overall vibe of the album feels most like VH II and women and
children first upon my first few listens. but chuck klosterman of
grantland.com had a curious observation- that many of the songs sound
like they could've been on some of dave's past solo albums...and i
actually found that to be true once i listened several times. some of
them could've been on the eat em and smile, skyscraper, a little ain't
enough or DLR band albums.
the album sounded a little "off" to me and/or that something was
missing. once i realized a lot of this sounded like songs from dave's
past solo albums, it hit me what was missing...mike's harmonies. the
songs still have harmonies but it's not the signature VH sound that
mike brought to the band. i've been saying for awhile that as much as
ed's guitar and dave's frontman abilities set VH apart, so did mike's
harmonies. bands like ac/dc, aerosmith, led zep. etc...they didn't
have those kind of harmonies like VH did. it gave them a bit more pop
appeal and sing-along factor, while still rocking your socks off.
using a lot of old songs that were written when they were in their
early 20s and now playing them as they're pushing 60...feels weird.
it's hard and thrashy but it's like an old guy who marries a trophy
wife who's young enough to be his daughter- yeah, she's nice arm candy
and all...but you're old enough to be her dad and it just looks...off.
also, going from 1984 to 2012 between van roth albums (well, they had
those 2 songs in '96) is a HUGE gap. you can't have nearly 30 missing
yrs and not have all those yrs of musical transition and have it feel
right. they were about 30 when they broke up and nearly 60 now and
it's hard not to notice but it's like they're hoping you think it's
still the 1980s...but all those yrs are just...missing. you can't not
notice.
i also wonder if they considered ted templeman as producer for this
one. he's probably retired or semi-retired by now but he did do ALL
six van roth albums (and 1 van hagar album). he must know them as well
as anyone. i just wondered if it was considered...and if ted would've
taken them up on the offer, if asked. i wonder how different the album
would've sounded.
eddie sounds like he's regained his chops, which is a relief. both he
and al were surprisingly rusty on both reunion tours ('04 w/hagar and
'07 w/roth). klosterman said in his review that eddie seemed out to
prove he was still godzilla on guitar. he's right- ed's out to scorch
the earth once again.
and speaking of bass, i still haven't heard or seen what makes wolfie
any sort of musical prodigy. first off, i wonder how he really feels
about playing with a bunch of old dudes that are 40 yrs older than he
is. and what kid *really* wants to play with his old man?? most kids
his age wouldn't want to play classic rock oldies, much less play with
their old man.
you'd think he'd rather play with kids his own age and play modern
music. i always felt that if ed *had* to have his kid in the band, it
should've been as a 2nd guitarist or on keyboards during the keyboard
songs. that way they could've kept mike in the band. the way they gave
mike the heave-ho after all those yrs of being a loyal soldier was
really, really wrong, petty and vindictive.
chuck kosterman also had a comment that went something like, he has a
hard time telling if it's an album he really likes but doesn't want to
or if it's an album he really doesn't like but wants to. i kind of
realize what he means now. i do like it...but it's not totally a VH
album. it's kind of a dave album that eddie played on or something to
that effect. there are so many factors (the time gap from 1984, using
old songs, mike's harmonies missing) that it messes with your head and
being to judge it as a VH album.
i wonder if and when we'll get another album out of them or if dave
will rub the van 3 stooges clan wrong and they'll go back to sammy.
from the stuff i've seen of them together so far, it looks like
they're trying to make it work but there still seems to be awkward
moments. dave's dialed it back but can still rub nerves with the
forced jokes/laughs and perma-grin and the van halens are uber-flakes,
so it can blow up at any moment. when they were with sam it seemed
like 4 friends goofing off and having a blast onstage (outside of
maybe the '04 tour). with dave, it still seems more business than
pleasure.