MR

I think Dokken could have dominated 80's rock more than Motley Crue, Bob Jovi & Ratt ever could have because they had more originality in their music than the other three legendary 80's rock bands combined despite the lack of an image which would have set them apart but I think Dokken could have been the next Aerosmith or Van Halen of the 80's with Don Dokken's great vocals & George Lynch's guitar virtuosity but the MTV generation was clueless at the time wanting second rate Aerosmith/Kiss/Van Halen clones like Motley Crue to be their rock heroes.

Its hard to say. If Dokken would have stayed together after Back For the Attack they would have headlined arenas. There is no question their music was much better then those other bands you mentioned. They broke up at the wrong time!

Wayne wrote:I think Dokken could have dominated 80's rock more than Motley Crue, Bob Jovi & Ratt ever could have because they had more originality in their music than the other three legendary 80's rock bands combined despite the lack of an image which would have set them apart but I think Dokken could have been the next Aerosmith or Van Halen of the 80's with Don Dokken's great vocals & George Lynch's guitar virtuosity but the MTV generation was clueless at the time wanting second rate Aerosmith/Kiss/Van Halen clones like Motley Crue to be their rock heroes.

Dominated over MOTLEY CRUE and BON JOVI,i don't think they could have,originality in hair metal back then never sold music,it was image/music combined that made motley crue and bon jovi the greatest bands around {just my opinion}!

Dokken WAS a good band but they were obviously not going to dominate any era of music. The best thing about them was George Lynch. The rest of the band was average at best. Don Dokken, in my opinion, is not that great of a vocalist or frontman. Bon Jovi and Motley Crue had the attitude and the craftmanship of great music (Bon Jovi still has this TODAY) to dominate the hard-rock scene.
Here's a few other bands from the 80s that I would definitely put ahead of Dokken:

Def Leppard
Whitesnake
Guns-N-Roses
Metallica
Van Hagar

Here's one more band that puts Dokken to shame:

QUEENSRYCHE

This band to me is the most underrated band of the 80s.
Operation:Mindcrime, in my opinion, is the greatest album of the 1980s.

There were at least 2000 bands that were more deserving than Motley Crue...Dokken was pretty big from the time "Alone Again" started getting spins up until they released the live album and had a pretty large fan base, so I don't really know how much more could be expected from them.

Judging by your username I would say you're a big Bon Jovi fan and thats fine for you. But IMO Dokken is better then Bon Jovi in every way. Bon Jovi was a buble gum band for the girls. Dokken had and still has the great vocals, harmonies and guitars that are hard to beat. Bon Jovi was very radio friendly, made nice ballads and was pretty to look at. That was the 1980's formula to make it big. I do agree with you that Queensryche was underrated.

Dokken was a good band, but I always found them to be a little on the boring side live. Don Dokken is an average frontman at best. George Lynch was always the main attraction.

Dokken's overall package was not complete. Bands like Bon Jovi, Poison, and Motley Crue had the entire package (songs, personality, and great live acts.)

For me its substance over style and that's why Dokken is better then the others. True, Dokken didn't use fireworks, flying monkeys or dick tricks on stage but its the music that matters.

Dokken are great and unique musicians but what hurt them was when members left and the group fell apart in 1989 which was kind of early in the scene. Same goes for Twisted Sister and Quiet Riot at the time. Also I think what hurt them was when they reformed and the labels didn't care.

Dokken didn't have to worry about the media and MTV ignoring them.

I love the band, but the reason they didn't dominate quite like Motley Crue, Poison and Def Leppard is they spent too much time fighting with each other.

During the first reunion they released on decent CD and one truly horrendous album.

When George Lynch left a second time, they came up with Erase the Slate, which was okay, but not great. I loved Long Way From Home, and their new CD was only marginally okay.

Dokken eat's Crue's lunch, Dokken is a far better band in all aspects. Mick Mars just sucks on guitar and the only good thing about the Crue is Tommy's drumming.

Dokken had way too much inner turmoil to make things work. They indeed had an awesome sound and Lynch's guitar playing, but the fighting was just too much. Read This

Lynch Interview

Lebronfan wrote:For me its substance over style and that's why Dokken is better then the others. True, Dokken didn't use fireworks, flying monkeys or dick tricks on stage but its the music that matters.

I personally think 80's rock is for the dogs because it's more about image than music with only a few highlights as in Metal Health by Quiet Riot & Shout At The Devil by Motly Crue which is why 60's/70's rock will always be dominant. Dokken should have been much bigger than Motley Crue, Bon Jovi & Poison in the 80's because Don Dokken was a much better vocalist & George Lynch a much better guitarist with much better music but the first MTV generation didn't have enough sense at the time.

No.

Dokken = George Lynch

Dokken wouldn't have dominated anything. I do dig a lot of their material but there is only so many songs you can write about that girl who left you. This band was seriously dysfunctional (no pun intended). Its a fact that they hated each other from the get go. They were very unprofessional during live shows. With Don & George fighting on stage, spitting on each other or refusing to play together. The 80s were very much about image and Dokken didn't have one. The videos they put out were cheesy even when they first were released. Were they talented? Hell yes, all 4 were imo. Would they have hit it big if they didn't break up? I doubt it. Dokken always was an opening band and never had the fan base to run a full length headlining tour. Of course this is all my opinion and to add one more thing... without the playing of GL this band would of been lost in the mix of all the others from the genre.

Firstly, I love all bands from Deep Purple, Van Halen, Kiss, Maiden, Queensryche, Ozzy, Extreme, Whitesnake, Crue, Leppard, Jovi, Foo Fighters, Metallica, Anthrax list goes on. I have over 100 Rock DVDs, too many CDs and tapes, stacks of mags and studied rock for 20 years. As much as I love and grew up to Dokken albums, one thing is for sure, they blew it in the late 80s (alcohol, drugs and egos ). As for songs, they definately had better material than the other 80's Hair Bands. Dokken produced consistent CDs in the 80's that were melodic and had balls with great guitar work such as Tooth and Nail, Kiss of Death, The Hunter, Breaking the Chains. Unfortunately, wimpy ballads were a prerequsite from heavy handed labels (MTV airplay ensures success) much to George Lynch's annoyance. They did reach their peak by 1988 and since have only mantained thier loyal followers and grabbing a few young fans here and there. If you check out Dokken live in Japan 95, he struggled vocally and as a performer very average. It is Lynch's guitar work and Pilson's backing vocals that prove a saving point for Dokken. The best thing that came out of their split was Lynch Mob's Wicked Sensation-Great Album. Also met Lynch in Sydney in-store appearance and spoke for about 10 min and what a cool guy, was interested in talking about anything, his next instrumental project, our Emotional Asylum Debut Cd, mentioned that the 2nd Lynch Mob Cd had originally Glenn Hughes vocals over it until the producer lost it and signed everything and happily posed for photos. Legend!

Wayne wrote:I think Dokken could have dominated 80's rock more than Motley Crue, Bob Jovi & Ratt ever could have because they had more originality in their music than the other three legendary 80's rock bands combined despite the lack of an image which would have set them apart but I think Dokken could have been the next Aerosmith or Van Halen of the 80's with Don Dokken's great vocals & George Lynch's guitar virtuosity but the MTV generation was clueless at the time wanting second rate Aerosmith/Kiss/Van Halen clones like Motley Crue to be their rock heroes.

No. Could've??? Why didn't they? After Under Lock and Key their career was continuous going down. I liked Dokken don't get me wrong, but I think what was missing from then was that good time rock in roll. I meet Dokken once before.....as individuals they seemed like good guys...they just really lacked chemistry.

exsgt33 wrote:Dokken was a good band, but I always found them to be a little on the boring side live. Don Dokken is an average frontman at best. George Lynch was always the main attraction.

Dokken's overall package was not complete. Bands like Bon Jovi, Poison, and Motley Crue had the entire package (songs, personality, and great live acts.)

I disagree about your accessments of Don and George. They both needed each other. Don did not seem to make quality music without George and George failed to do the same without Don. I also disagree with Don being an average frontman at best. First off, he carried the load since George really was too shy to even be a rock guitarist. I had seen Don on the Under Lock and Key tour and he was very flamboyant. Without Don, Dokken would've been the Cars live. Sure George can play guitars....he is just boring. Don's flamboyant personality and George's shy personality were bound to clash. George just did not have the personality to be a rock star. Dokken was doomed for a cult following.

As many hit on, it was the internal problems that doomed this band. Really they were only big for one album. The others mentioned above had a longer legacy......and they all oozed with good time rock and roll anthems....which has always sold more concert tickets and cds.

Many valid comments here, regarding the band's "inner turmoil" (Mick messing around with Jeff's woman in the 90s didn't help, either), Lynch's shyness, Don's vocal limitations, etc. The band's initial breakup is what prevented them from further success. Really, their songs (even the most radio-friendly ones) were better than those of Ratt, Bon Jovi, Poison (ack!), post-Slide It In Whitesnake and post-Pyromania Def Leppard. Where the rhythm section is concerned, how is the Pilson-Brown tandem any worse than the guys in any of those bands? Blotzer, Torres, Dall, Savage, etc. Nothing special there. And as much as I love Queensryche, you can't tell me Eddie Jackson and Scott Rockenfeld are a spectacular rhythm section. QR's all about Tate, DeGarmo & Wilton. In fact, aside from Rush, and without getting into prog groups (and no, Metallica doesn't impress me), the rhythm sections of Megadeth and especially Fates Warning were/are the exceptional ones. For straight-up hard rock, Pilson/Brown did just fine, held the groove, kept the pulse, etc. And yes, the main attraction was George's excellent axework. That's why the Japan Live '95 DVD is still cool to watch, even as Don struggles.

all valid arguments
IMO the band peaked on One Live Night
the songs done acoustically really showed how great Lynch Pilson were as a songwritting team

FUNNY,
I WAS WATCHING SOME DOKKEN DVDS THIS PAST WEEK.
AND THE THING IS W/ DON DOKKEN HE WASN'T MUCH OF A FRONTMAN PER SAY...
A SIDE FROM SMOKING & PLAYING AIR DRUMS HE JUST STOOD THERE..
I'VE SEEN THEM LIVE AT LEAST 20 TIMES SINCE THE 80'S & DON DOKKEN RARELY MOVES MORE THAN 4 FOOT...
BUT ALL IN ALL DOKKEN WAS ONE OF THE BEST FROM THE 80'S..

Lebronfan wrote:For me its substance over style and that's why Dokken is better then the others. True, Dokken didn't use fireworks, flying monkeys or dick tricks on stage but its the music that matters.

I agree with what you're saying, LeBron fan. Dokken was a far better band musically than the "fluff stuff" like Bon Jovi, and all of us musicians know this. The average non-musician could never fully appreciate Dokken, just like they could not get their ears around M.S.G. or Yngwie Malmsteen. Dokken lyrics tend to be melancholy, true, but they are also meaningful, and Don Dokken sings with a beautiful tone. His sings with the beauty of a classically trained singer, like the lead singer of Queensryche and Goran Edman (sang on several Yngwie albums). Lynch, likewise, is up there with guys like Yngwie and Schenker, a virtuosic guitar master. I think Dokken achieved pretty good popularity for a band that made real music and that didn't make party music with mindless lyrics. I always had the impression that they had a little more of a following than M.S.G. or Yngwie (They still get more radio play than either), so I think they did pretty well here in the U.S. I have all 4 of their eighties albums plus Don's solo album, "Up From the Ashes", with John Norum on guitar. I'm also a Europe fan, so I especially enjoy this album.

dokkens management didnt take advantage of thier popularity, they should have tried headlining or co headlining for back for the attack instead of opening for aerosmith, after that they took the MOR/vh tour 4th on the bill and it killed them.
from that point on nothing they could do would allow them to headline
don didnt have any limitations until after lynch left.

Dokken is underrated for sure...it was an amazing band..and yeah should be included like one of the best...like W.A.S.P. =)
Personally i like more dokken than Bon Jovi...
Besos ciao!

Maybe if they had been from Europe, they would have had a bigger fanbase over there. M.S.G. has a lot of fans across the pond, far more than over here.

the only thing I didn't like about GL, he never played live what was played exactly on the record.

I was always amazed how much of a mess he sounded live and how he sounded so great in the studio.

blast me if you want but he never played it the way it was played in the studio.

Dokken dominating 80's rock more than Motley Crue? You're kidding, right? Poison had a better run in the 80's than Dokken did.