Eddie Van Halen has died....

[Wexahu]

No harm intended on my part. I agree with you about the 8th grader issue. They would not likely know the names John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Mick Jagger, or Jimmy Page either. The only reason they would know who Elton John is would be because of the Lion King or the recent movie about his life.

I understand your point about DLR. I am a huge fan of his and agree that VH's best stuff was when he fronted the band. I think the difference is that the band could go on without him. It cannot go on without Eddie. Not sure I know how to explain it, but I really do believe that to be the case. The only argument against that would be the entire Van Halen III album, but that is outside the scope of this conversation. Up until his death was announced, many of us still held out hope that we might see some new Van Halen material. That hope is gone now. The rest of VH can still go do other stuff, but it will never be VH again.

Obviously, people have strong opinions about this, but I believe any guitarist worth their salt will express that EVH influenced them at some point as they were learning their craft. The list of people who fit that category can be counted on one hand.

Not disagreeing with your point necessarily, but you compared EVH to Mick Jagger in terms of his importance to the band. I think you'd be surprised how popular Van Halen could have remained had DLR stayed somewhat sane, and he, AVH and Michael Anthony gone out and recruited a new guitarist. We'll never know, and the music might not have been quite the same but my guess is they'd have still been very relevant. The Stones without Jagger? I don't think so. I just don't think that is a great comparison. DLR was HUGE in the early-mid 80's.

 

[Mean Purple]

What gets me about EVH, is his journey to guitar. Started in piano, and was awesome. Goes and wins big youth contests in CA. Only he, his dad and his piano teacher knew he couldn't read music. He was a virtuoso as a kid, and his teach could not tell he could not read music for almost 5 years ... until he had EVH turning pages for him one day and EVH kept missing the page turn. EVH had learned by ear and immulating finger placements on chords and scales of the songs. Unfrickinreal

Then he picks up guitar and takes it to a whole new frickin insane level of play by ear. Not sure if he ever learned to read music.

 

[Zubaz]

Not disagreeing with your point necessarily, but you compared EVH to Mick Jagger in terms of his importance to the band. I think you'd be surprised how popular Van Halen could have remained had DLR stayed somewhat sane, and he, AVH and Michael Anthony gone out and recruited a new guitarist. We'll never know, and the music might not have been quite the same but my guess is they'd have still been very relevant. The Stones without Jagger? I don't think so. I just don't think that is a great comparison. DLR was HUGE in the early-mid 80's.

Not a bad point, but all that you said was also true of Axl. Yet when Slash and the rest left and Axl put together his "GNRINO", nobody cared either. You could probably even argue that Velvet Revolver was a bigger deal in the mid-to-late 2000's than Axl's GNR session band.

(and this coming from a guy that digs Axl and thinks Chinese Democracy is quite underrated).

 

[Mean Purple]

I honestly have no idea how he even plays anymore. Have you seen a closeup of his fingers? He looks like he has walnuts for knuckles.

Gives me hope for my old age.

 

[Wexahu]

So was Axl, but when Slash and the rest left and Axl put together his "GNRINO", nobody cared either. You could probably even argue that Velvet Revolver was a bigger deal in the mid-to-late 2000's than Axl's GNR session band.

(and this coming from a guy that digs Axl and thinks Chinese Democracy is quite underrated).

Right, I mean DLR left and couldn't sustain anything. Whether it's because the music sucked or he just got too insane is up for interpretation, but he wasn't much without Van Halen. Sucked actually.

But you're equating Slash and the rest of the band with just EVH. I guess the comparison would be if just Slash left, could GNR had continued to be successful with Axl and the other three? My guess is probably yes, but who knows.

Once DLR left Van Halen, a whole bunch of their fans didn't like the band as much, and they got less and less popular....no doubt partially due to grunge,etc and changing trends in the latter years.

 

[gohornedfrogs]

Name a band or a musician who is more influential than EVH. There may be a few equals, but the list is very short. The Beatles changed music in a huge way. So did Elvis. The British Invasion with bands like The Stones, the Who, and the Beatles were huge. Jimi Hendrix changed the way the guitar was viewed as an instrument. EVH came along and built upon what others had started but revolutionized the instrument and influenced all other rock guitarists who would follow in the next 3-4 decades. To minimize his impact on music as we know it today is to admit a lack of basic understanding of rock and roll music for the past 40 years. I do not think it is hyperbole to state that he has has been the single biggest influencer of rock guitarists in the past 4 decades. Those who did not lift ideas from him or imitate him most certainly respected his innovation and abilities.

I'd add one name to that list. David Bowie was a major influence on the entire post-punk, new wave genre that extended into alternative rock. He was a visionary in his use of stage theatrics. He was also a significant cultural icon. Not saying his legacy is better or worse than Van Halen's, but he certainly deserves mentioning.

 

[tcudoc]

Not disagreeing with your point necessarily, but you compared EVH to Mick Jagger in terms of his importance to the band. I think you'd be surprised how popular Van Halen could have remained had DLR stayed somewhat sane, and he, AVH and Michael Anthony gone out and recruited a new guitarist. We'll never know, and the music might not have been quite the same but my guess is they'd have still been very relevant. The Stones without Jagger? I don't think so. I just don't think that is a great comparison. DLR was HUGE in the early-mid 80's.

When you are the band's namesake, it is hard to do what you have described. That would be like Santana touring without Carlos. He (Carlos) always had a whole host of musicians and singers surrounding him, but he WAS (is) the band. I know you are going to say, well "Alex had the same name." But let's be honest, Alex would have been the most easily replaced in the band and no one (few) showed up to see him. Fleetwood Mac is the only band I can think of where the band was named after the drummer (except for bands that were just named after all members of the band) and where the band would likely cease to exist without his presence in the band.
I agree that DLR was a big star in his solo career, but he just surrounded himself with people who were influenced by EVH and could simulate a similar guitar style (except for when he got real eccentric on the remakes of Beach Boys and Sinatra). Not to discount him, because I like him a lot and he contributed greatly to making VH successful, but he was not as good when left to himself as the musical creative mind. VH was not as good without him either.
Good discussion. I enjoy classic rock discussions, so i understand your opinion, I just enjoy the banter.

 

[tcudoc]

I'd add one name to that list. David Bowie was a major influence on the entire post-punk, new wave genre that extended into alternative rock. He was a visionary in his use of stage theatrics. He was also a significant cultural icon. Not saying his legacy is better or worse than Van Halen's, but he certainly deserves mentioning.

Absolutely! He was one of a kind and his influence is still seen today.

 

[Mean Purple]

Great interview

 

[FBallFan123]

I teach 8th grade, and I asked the kids if they knew who he was. Of the 6 kids in the room, NONE of them knew him. I asked if they ever heard of the band Van Halen. NONE OF THEM KNEW.

Their parents have failed them in so many ways.

Sadly, a lot of times it takes a great musicians death for there to be renewed interest in their work.

See it a lot, how album sales spike after they pass on...

 

[Frog-in-law1995]

Not disagreeing with your point necessarily, but you compared EVH to Mick Jagger in terms of his importance to the band. I think you'd be surprised how popular Van Halen could have remained had DLR stayed somewhat sane, and he, AVH and Michael Anthony gone out and recruited a new guitarist. We'll never know, and the music might not have been quite the same but my guess is they'd have still been very relevant. The Stones without Jagger? I don't think so. I just don't think that is a great comparison. DLR was HUGE in the early-mid 80's.

I think my DLR bona fides are sufficiently established on this board, and I have no doubt EVH was the force behind Van Halen’s success. They were still a rock and roll HOF caliber band with Sammy, while Dave hooked up with 3 of the very best all time on their instruments in Billy Sheehan, Gregg Bissinette and Steve Vai and they produced a good EP, 1 really good (admittedly, maybe my fave) album and 1 not-so-terrible album with a good single before turning to complete [ Finebaum ]. There’s just something about that EVH sound.

 

[Hoosierfrog]

Name a band or a musician who is more influential than EVH. There may be a few equals, but the list is very short. The Beatles changed music in a huge way. So did Elvis. The British Invasion with bands like The Stones, the Who, and the Beatles were huge. Jimi Hendrix changed the way the guitar was viewed as an instrument. EVH came along and built upon what others had started but revolutionized the instrument and influenced all other rock guitarists who would follow in the next 3-4 decades. To minimize his impact on music as we know it today is to admit a lack of basic understanding of rock and roll music for the past 40 years. I do not think it is hyperbole to state that he has has been the single biggest influencer of rock guitarists in the past 4 decades. Those who did not lift ideas from him or imitate him most certainly respected his innovation and abilities.

Are you just talking hard rock or the entirety of rock, because as much as I like VanHalen, I’m sure they would even say the Beatles are in a totally different strata when talking about influence as a band, I’m not even sure VH would be top 5. As a single musician, you may have an argument, but I’m sure you’d get arguments from Clapton, Santana, Brian May, Jimmy Page, Mark Knopfler, Joe Satriani people. It’s such a subjective taste thing, I don’t think there is definitive way to rank it. Such as Rolling Stones top 10, for my taste EVH certainly needs to go ahead of Keith Richards, Bb King, Chuck Berry and Jeff Beck.

Rolling Stone’s top 10 are:

1. Hendrix
2. Clapton
3. Page
4. Richards
5. Beck
6. BB King
7. Chuck Berry
8. EVH
9. Duane Allman
10. Pete Townsend

 

[Hoosierfrog]

When you are the band's namesake, it is hard to do what you have described. That would be like Santana touring without Carlos. He (Carlos) always had a whole host of musicians and singers surrounding him, but he WAS (is) the band. I know you are going to say, well "Alex had the same name." But let's be honest, Alex would have been the most easily replaced in the band and no one (few) showed up to see him. Fleetwood Mac is the only band I can think of where the band was named after the drummer (except for bands that were just named after all members of the band) and where the band would likely cease to exist without his presence in the band.
I agree that DLR was a big star in his solo career, but he just surrounded himself with people who were influenced by EVH and could simulate a similar guitar style (except for when he got real eccentric on the remakes of Beach Boys and Sinatra). Not to discount him, because I like him a lot and he contributed greatly to making VH successful, but he was not as good when left to himself as the musical creative mind. VH was not as good without him either.
Good discussion. I enjoy classic rock discussions, so i understand your opinion, I just enjoy the banter.

Actually Fleetwood Mac was named after the drummer and bass player John McVie as the Mac part.

 

[Wexahu]

I think my DLR bona fides are sufficiently established on this board, and I have no doubt EVH was the force behind Van Halen’s success. They were still a rock and roll HOF caliber band with Sammy, while Dave hooked up with 3 of the very best all time on their instruments in Billy Sheehan, Gregg Bissinette and Steve Vai and they produced a good EP, 1 really good (admittedly, maybe my fave) album and 1 not-so-terrible album with a good single before turning to complete [ Cumbie’s red zone playcalling ]. There’s just something about that EVH sound.

I'm far from a music historian or an expert on who is "good" or not, I just know what I like. Van Halen to me is like Pearl Jam in that I think they have some awesome songs but their albums (and the ones mainly in the DLR years) have some stuff that to me just sucks. I'm not a huge fan of the real hard fast-paced rock stuff though, if it doesn't have a good melody I'm out. It just gets worse as I get older.

 

[FBallFan123]

 

[stbrab]

Name a band or a musician who is more influential than EVH. There may be a few equals, but the list is very short. The Beatles changed music in a huge way. So did Elvis. The British Invasion with bands like The Stones, the Who, and the Beatles were huge. Jimi Hendrix changed the way the guitar was viewed as an instrument. EVH came along and built upon what others had started but revolutionized the instrument and influenced all other rock guitarists who would follow in the next 3-4 decades. To minimize his impact on music as we know it today is to admit a lack of basic understanding of rock and roll music for the past 40 years. I do not think it is hyperbole to state that he has has been the single biggest influencer of rock guitarists in the past 4 decades. Those who did not lift ideas from him or imitate him most certainly respected his innovation and abilities.

As a classic rock fan, I love your passion for this subject. And I would certainly agree EVH is one of the greatest and most influential guitarists of all time. As far as being more influential, as a band I’d say the Beatles. There’s the Beatles, then everyone else. Not only the evolution of their music, but their innovations in the recording studio changed music forever. As guitarists, I’d say Clapton, Hendrix and Beck...a lot definitely depends on your personal tastes. Just my 2 cents.

By the way, EVH said he was most influenced by Clapton. I have always found this interesting, because they have completely different styles.

 

[Hemingway]

you disrespectful jackwagons are not derailing this thread. Eddie Van Halen was one of the most influential and transformational rock guitarist in history.
In the big survey a handful of years back of the Top 100 of all time, EVH was ranked #1.

I don’t know man.. it is basically guitar gymnastics. Maybe in Rock guitarist genre he’s #1. If thats the style you like then cool.

I’d prefer to listen to Clapton, Travis Trucks, SRV, etc.

 

[More Frogs the Better]

I'm far from a music historian or an expert on who is "good" or not, I just know what I like. Van Halen to me is like Pearl Jam in that I think they have some awesome songs but their albums (and the ones mainly in the DLR years) have some stuff that to me just sucks. I'm not a huge fan of the real hard fast-paced rock stuff though, if it doesn't have a good melody I'm out. It just gets worse as I get older.

I'm not an NBA fan but don't have to be to know that LeBron James is good at basketball. 80's metal is certainly not my favorite genre and many VH songs are without a doubt lacking if you're looking for some music with deep artistic meaning. Most of my appreciation of their stuff is just as a vehicle for his guitar playing and if you appreciate pure greatness, you can't help but appreciate the creativity and methods that EVH pioneered and served to influence so many others. I've seen Van Halen with DLR and SH and every time we went it was to see and hear Eddie play the guitar and didn't really care who was singing.

 

[Mean Purple]

I don’t know man.. it is basically guitar gymnastics. Maybe in Rock guitarist genre he’s #1. If thats the style you like then cool.

I’d prefer to listen to Clapton, Travis Trucks, SRV, etc.

Clapton, yeah, I dig that big time. Clapton was someone EVH admired. But I can't agree that it is basically guitar gymnastics. Even his wild solos were done in the scope of the songs' form (ab, aba, etc.) And his musical innovation was done with the harmonics in mind. To go that wild and still keep a song's theme shows a good feel for music theory. Heck, I'd have to give music theory props to his brother as well. His musicality on the drums went beyond just keeping time. Obviously, not as good as the master from Rush, but still really, really good.

 

[BrewingFrog]

Imagine when George Harrison died, saying "He didn't have a meaningful album in 20 years". Preposterous.

Funny you bring that up. I drove a ways this morning and had 'Cloud 9' on part of the way. I remember when that album landed it was sort of lost, but it had a lot of good things on it like Ringo playing on "When We Was Fab" and sounding great. It also led to a creative explosion between the Thames Valley Gang, Tom Petty and Roy Orbison that produced a crap-ton of good music.

Sigh.