MR

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 3:55 pm**

So, Im usually not a concert reviewer because it's a subjective thing and a different experience for each person, but Saturday night confirmed that I am indeed a Sammy person. Not that I dont like DLR , Dave brought a fun and party attitude to the early days of Van Halen and there are great freakin' songs in those first albums. Sammy bought more depth and an amazing song writing ability to the second phase of VH. The difference to ME was blatant Saturday night. Now, I've seen DLR solo, I've seen Sammy solo, I've seen VH with Sammy and VH with Dave. Sammy is a showman just as much as Dave, but he loves his audience. He works with them, he's there for THEM....he's throwing you a party and you're personally being invited by him to be one with the band. Dave is there for Dave. The awkward dancing, the Michael Jackson sliding across the stage, the high kicks and spins finishing with a pleading look to the audience for acceptance is rather pathetic for a 58 year old man. Not that it isn't entertaining, but it should be a side note, not the highlight of your talent.

All that aside, I come to hear the songs, the MUSIC, and Van Halen MUSICALLY delivered. The music was ON, it was tight, it sounded amazing, like it was still 1984. Alex was awesome, and while the voice and presence of Michael Anthony is still sorely missing, Wolfie holds his own as a great musician in the making. That kid has a future. And Eddie... what can you say about Eddie? He looks good, he looks healthy and he, still, is undeniably one of the best guitarist in the world. Dave....was a joke. From the very opening note, he "talked" sang every song, maybe with the exception of Panama. He let the audience sing for him, he let Eddie and Wolfie sing for him. If this is the reason for the 30+ upcoming show postponements, it's totally understandable.

Btw....Kool and the Gang, KICKED ASS!!!

Posted: **Tue May 22, 2012 4:42 pm**

Angiekay wrote: Dave....was a joke. From the very opening note, he "talked" sang every song, maybe with the exception of Panama. He let the audience sing for him, he let Eddie and Wolfie sing for him.

That really sucks. Dude can't sing worth a damn anymore.

Posted: **Wed May 23, 2012 1:56 am**

Thanks 4 the review, Angie.

Posted: **Wed May 23, 2012 6:43 am**

Yeah, people got mad at me for saying it, but the show I went two a few weeks ago was not very good and not near as good as 2007....

I hope Chickenfoot makes it to town this year....

Posted: **Fri May 25, 2012 5:55 am**

people dave rarely, if ever, sang live even back in their glory days.....he's always been a "circus leader" live and makes no apolgies for it....in fact, in many ways he singing more now than he ever did before.

you either love dave or hate him for the most part.

Posted: **Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:59 am**

Great review. You pointed out the differences between Dave and Sammy perfectly. I understand diehard original VH fans not recogniizing this because they are baised. But anyone from the outside can clearly see that Sammy is so much more talented than Dave. It's really not even close. Dave's Schtick was kind of cool in the 70's, but it's just sad now.

Posted: **Tue Jun 12, 2012 12:03 am**

'sad now'...so well put...

Posted: **Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:46 am**

Sammy Hagar is a fat asshole and his songs in Van Halen were gay.

Long live DLR.

:wink:

Posted: **Wed Jun 13, 2012 1:09 pm**

AR wrote:Sammy Hagar is a fat asshole and his songs in Van Halen were gay.

Long live DLR.

I'll shell out more money to listen to Sammy then the less than a dime I'll ever give DLR again. He's a joke. Sammy's got more talent in that fat ass then DLR ever had or ever will.

Posted: **Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:24 am**

Angiekay wrote:
AR wrote:Sammy Hagar is a fat asshole and his songs in Van Halen were gay.

Long live DLR.

I'll shell out more money to listen to Sammy then the less than a dime I'll ever give DLR again. He's a joke. Sammy's got more talent in that fat ass then DLR ever had or ever will.

LOL, you haven't a clue.

Posted: **Thu Jun 14, 2012 7:34 am**

I like Sammy but his fans are vicious.

Posted: **Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:19 pm**

No Surprize wrote:
Angiekay wrote:
AR wrote:Sammy Hagar is a fat asshole and his songs in Van Halen were gay.

Long live DLR.

I'll shell out more money to listen to Sammy then the less than a dime I'll ever give DLR again. He's a joke. Sammy's got more talent in that fat ass then DLR ever had or ever will.

LOL, you haven't a clue.

That's what you think. :twisted:

Posted: **Thu Jun 14, 2012 3:23 pm**

Different strokes for different folks... some like it in the butt, some in the cooter..... either way ya get laid..

With Hagar/VH you get a concert..

With DLR/VH you get a show...

Both good...

Posted: **Thu Jun 14, 2012 10:34 pm**

I didn't get much of a show the last time I saw DLR...Just incessant babbling about speed dogs, poor vocals and a show laced with zero chemistry of a band...

I point that out and was picked apart on here and told how great things were and how I must be wrong….two weeks later they cancelled – ah I mean – ‘postponed’ the tour…

It's funny, how mad the DLR fans get when someone says anything negative about him, a current show or points out that Sammy is simply better in their opinion...

All of the sudden you "don't have a clue" or you are ignorant and now even vicious…

The other thing that really, really cracks me up is the notion that Sammy took the bad too pop….

Have you ever listened to 1984? Sorry guys, that’s already done….

I LOVE 1984, but let’s be honest, “I’ll Wait”, “Jump”, “1984”, etc. those songs are not the second coming of Black Sabbath. Neither is “Dancin’ In the Street” etc.

If pressed I’d say my two favorite VH albums were (in this order) 5150 and Van Halen. 5150 is probably my favorite album ever period. Does it sound very 1986 – Hell Yes. But guess what…It was 1986! But they have not made a VH album yet that I don’t enjoy spinning – and I loved the last one they just put out as well.

Posted: **Fri Jun 15, 2012 1:24 am**

slucero wrote:With Hagar/VH you get a concert..
With DLR/VH you get a show...

That's the way I always saw it. :-)

I preferred the Roth era music (but liked Hagar era music as well). I always found Roth to be more of a showman, but a truly awful live singer. Hagar's a decent showman IMO, but a shines as a live singer.

Posted: **Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:47 am**

How will I know when it's love? pussified Van Halen for me forever with Sammy. If that is "depth" in song writing you can have it. I like Sammy (moreso his solo and Montrose stuff) but his fans ALWAYS have to criticize DLR. Just shut the fuck up already. I really want to like both eras but it gets hard to sometimes.

So sick of the pussification of rock. The singer isn't the biggest part. If it was The Rolling Stones, Dylan, Springsteen and others would have never made it. Go fucking watch Glee or American Idol.

Nothing against AngieKay's post either. It's all subjective as she said. I'm just sick of the focus being on vocals.

Posted: **Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:53 am**

masque wrote:people dave rarely, if ever, sang live even back in their glory days.....he's always been a "circus leader" live and makes no apolgies for it....in fact, in many ways he singing more now than he ever did before.

you either love dave or hate him for the most part.

+1

Posted: **Mon Jun 25, 2012 6:37 am**

I have seen both front men with VH and solo. I will say I am a Hagar fan, let that be know. I think both men put on a good show, Roth more geared to showy, flashy me, me , me rock. Hagar geared more toward just play and have a good time. I would take Hagar solo any day over Roth solo.
But in VH, it is not about who is the better front man, cause Eddie is the true star here. Anyone could sing for the band, and it would work somewhat. Eddie. Eddie, Eddie, you have heard the chant at a concert. I have heard it with both guys leading the band, and heard it on boots with what his in the band. Eddie is the draw, the main draw. Hagar or Roth, or whoever else is a bonus. Hagar seemed to IMO realize that. Roth doesn't, but should. He flopped as a solo artist, andwass kicked out of one reunion for hogging the stage. Roth is a natural showman, and I like his concerts both solo and with VH, but in VH he seems to be the me me me thing too much.

Posted: **Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:38 am**

Abitaman wrote:I have seen both front men with VH and solo. I will say I am a Hagar fan, let that be know. I think both men put on a good show, Roth more geared to showy, flashy me, me , me rock. Hagar geared more toward just play and have a good time. I would take Hagar solo any day over Roth solo.
But in VH, it is not about who is the better front man, cause Eddie is the true star here. Anyone could sing for the band, and it would work somewhat. Eddie. Eddie, Eddie, you have heard the chant at a concert. I have heard it with both guys leading the band, and heard it on boots with what his in the band. Eddie is the draw, the main draw. Hagar or Roth, or whoever else is a bonus. Hagar seemed to IMO realize that. Roth doesn't, but should. He flopped as a solo artist, andwass kicked out of one reunion for hogging the stage. Roth is a natural showman, and I like his concerts both solo and with VH, but in VH he seems to be the me me me thing too much.

Roth did not flop. I don't know if you saw him live right after Van Halen, but in the mid-west, he was filling arenas. I saw those shows. His videos were all over MTV. His band was arguably better than Van Halen musically (Sheehan, Vai, Bissonette).

Posted: **Mon Jun 25, 2012 6:35 pm**

AR wrote:How will I know when it's love? pussified Van Halen for me forever with Sammy. If that is "depth" in song writing you can have it. I like Sammy (moreso his solo and Montrose stuff) but his fans ALWAYS have to criticize DLR. Just shut the fuck up already. I really want to like both eras but it gets hard to sometimes.

So sick of the pussification of rock. The singer isn't the biggest part. If it was The Rolling Stones, Dylan, Springsteen and others would have never made it. Go fucking watch Glee or American Idol.

Nothing against AngieKay's post either. It's all subjective as she said. I'm just sick of the focus being on vocals.

Agree. It's not always about the vocals, it's what fit's the music. If it was all about the vocals, bands like Metallica, Megadeth, Iron Maiden etc., would never be as popular as they are. Dave always bought the show and fire that is Van Halen.

Posted: **Mon Jun 25, 2012 9:50 pm**

lowdbrent wrote:Roth did not flop. I don't know if you saw him live right after Van Halen, but in the mid-west, he was filling arenas. I saw those shows. His videos were all over MTV. His band was arguably better than Van Halen musically (Sheehan, Vai, Bissonette).

Yes I did, but as an entertainer he still was good. But with material after his second solo CD was bad. His 3rd had some good songs, but for the most part, IMO was poor. But the man could still hold his own on stage. As far as sales, Hagar and Roth both fail off in the late 90's, but just about everyone has.

Posted: **Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:30 pm**

Each to their own I guess. I went to the Toronto show and it ripped.

MR

St Paul Show

St Paul Show

Re: St Paul Show