Diver Down Sound

[Hummingbird]

I've always thought the production on DD sucked. Compared to the rest of the six pack, the sound is thin, the album sort of quiet. One of the hallmarks of the early VH sound was the rich, full sound - and this album doesn't have it at all. When I first bought it, I wondered if maybe I'd bought a defective disc.

Yet, I've never heard anyone talk about it on any of the VH forums I've lurked at. Nor have I heard Ed (or anyone else) mention it in any interviews. The only thing I've ever heard was that Ed had a string catch on a bobbin on Franky on the WDFA tour, adversely affecting his tone from then on. But even then, that just refers to his tone. I know I've heard Ed remark on the production for VH II (the whole 'lot of coke on the console' statement), but nothing for DD.

Has anyone ever heard any comment on why DD sounds the way it does? I've sometimes wondered if it was influenced by the sound of radio - I recall an interview where Ed mentioned that they were listening to a transistor in Louisville, KY when "Big Bad Bill" came on, and the band collectively had an orgasm over it. My only theory is that the production was some kind of homage to the sound of radio.

Still, I feel cheated. My complaints about the album are not the typical ones about song selection, but rather that the songs don't sound as rich as they could.

Thoughts?

[Yount]

From what I've read, Diver Down was a whip-up LP to go with the single Pretty Woman. Van Halen had just finished a grueling world tour and were keen to take time off (surprise surprise!) but when Pretty Woman caught on stronger than they had figured it would, an album to capitalize $eemed like a real plan. I assume they only had a few loose ideas floating around so they chose a few more covers. Maybe that explains the different sound. It was rushed a little more perhaps.

It's a deceptive album to me. Some real happy sounds that mask the usual dark lyrical content. I always try to picture Van Halen in '82. That album was really the beginning of superfame don't you think?

Compare Diver Down with the making of Fair Warning, FW supposedly was an Eddie baby that took a lot of time to record. DD is more of a Ted & Dave baby. This is only what I have read and heard from interviews. I like Diver Down a lot an I think it has a unique place in the VH catalog. And won't you tell me where have all the good times gone?

[SunisinuS]

I've always thought the production on DD sucked. Compared to the rest of the six pack, the sound is thin, the album sort of quiet. One of the hallmarks of the early VH sound was the rich, full sound - and this album doesn't have it at all. When I first bought it, I wondered if maybe I'd bought a defective disc

Agreed.

It comes first with the second repeated lick of "Where Have All the Good Times Gone" as the "thin" starts right there.

But: If you listen to it at the same volume....like to "Hang Em High" later in the album you will notice that they are loud.

I surmise that there are 3 songs on there that fit your sonic theory, like almost a dis-jointed 2 producer thing.

Here is the Oracle's take:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diver_Down

[Yount]

The production can blow but Van Halen still turns it into a summery warm fuzzy druggy good time! Don't get too critical... thank God VAN HALEN released ANYTHING in 1982!!!!!

[ashstralia]

It sounded good in my lj torana in the 80's..
Voxon stereo with pioneer speakers...

The sweet little 202 + triples singing her song...

God I miss those days

[Hummingbird]

I guess the rushed production theory makes a lot of sense. Reading between the lines of all of Ed's interview material from that era, it just sounds like it was an album that the VH bros. would rather not have made. Thank god for Dave & Ted, eh?

Don't get me wrong - I'm not down on the album at all. The songs are consistently good across the board, and it's got that great Dave-ish sense of humor. I love the uniqueness of "Secrets," and I can't ever listen to the "Little Guitars" suite in a moving vehicle without my right foot slamming down to the floorboard! It's just that I've always wondered why the sound was so different in '82.

I wish I'd been around & sentient enough to experience these albums as they came out...

[VAiN]

I'm going to completely disagree. I LOVE the sound on DD. The tone on 'Hang 'em High' and 'Little Guitars' is incredible. The drums sound natural and big.. I think that album has a wonderful, warm 'brown' sound to it. It's simple - like how a band sounds when they're playing in front of you in a small room.
I'll go so far as to say its better sounding than WACF - and I LOVE that album.

[Yount]

Pure speculation here, but my theory is that after Fair Warning the band was almost shot, at each others' throats, particularly Dave & Ed in terms of musical direction. I've read quotes where Ed was ready to leave the band before DD, and Dave told him "no more solos/guitar hero stuff".
Dave mentions in his book, Ed hiding away (with engineer Don Landee I think!) with the master tapes for Fair Warning... sounds like the start of the 5150 conversion.... that would then give Ed complete control. Dave would have been aware of this unfolding...

So then they do DD as a Dave/Ted thing. Some covers and a lot of "Daveness" on this LP. Maybe Dave could see it was all over and was subtly making steps to cross over into solo territory. Some of these songs have (like the cover art) a lot going on beneath the surface....

So either a rush recorded LP or a little "Dave-flavored fuck you" before the gates on Howdy Doody mountain shut for the remainder of the 80's, 90's, 00's - to explain the different sound on DD.

Why does Ed hate DD so much? I heard his pissed radio interview after DD was released and he was praising the covers and the original songs, sticking up for the band saying there's some good stuff in those songs and the media were the ones saying "Van Halen doing covers again bullshit". Since then he has stated publicly he hates it. I just assume it to be because Ed didn't have ultimate creative control.

Like I said, pure speculation.

[78/84 guy]

Fair Warning didn't sell well even though the tour was huge. I think it was a bad move for the most part. I love that album except Dancing In The Streets. But I'm with Ed on this one. He said that wasn't the direction he wanted the band too go in. But Dave & Ted wanted hits. With all the demos or back catolog the band had in the can at the time it's a shame they didn't use more of it. Like the stuff that showed up on A.D.K.O.T. How does the remasted sound ?

[Yount]

I think Ed and Al were lazy. They were pretty rich by then. They can pay out Dancing in the streets, and talk about the back catalog, and the 10 albums in the head of Ed... but would they have actually done anything if they hadn't done DD? Maybe, but it would have taken longer.

Hard to agree with Ed. He shouldn't be in charge. '84-onwards proves that point. Get back to your beer and write me another riff, guitar player!!

[Yount]

I think the VH Dancing in the streets is way cooler than the Bowie-Jagger cut!

[78/84 guy]

I think Ed and Al were lazy. They were pretty rich by then. They can pay out Dancing in the streets, and talk about the back catalog, and the 10 albums in the head of Ed... but would they have actually done anything if they hadn't done DD? Maybe, but it would have taken longer.

Hard to agree with Ed. He shouldn't be in charge. '84-onwards proves that point. Get back to your beer and write me another riff, guitar player!!

Well Dave's the one that walked away right ? It didn't really matter what Ed did after that. He was never going to replace Dave. He was lucky that people were still interested in his playing, or the only people listening to Van Hagar would be the girls. And I don't mind some of that stuff. I totally agree with Ed on that one. Maybe because it's the only thing he ever said that wasn't a lie ! Diver Down is lame in many ways as a Van Halen album. But it's still fun.

[Yount]

I think control-freak Dave walked away from control-freak Ed because of 5150 and the sluggish writing process.
I'm just curious... can you give a quick list of "lame" moments from DD please?

You've mentioned Dancing In the streets. What about it?

Anything else?

(For me, hmmm, Hang 'em high where Dave's verses are similar to the riff, Cathedral maybe is too long, I'm nit-picking though, this album is nice!!)

[Yount]

Oh wait, the album was TOO FUCKING SHORT, AGAIN!!

[78/84 guy]

Lame in Van Halen terms for me. No balls on it whatsoever ! Sure Hang Em' has a little. Even Little Guitars to a point. My point was they were in their prime for the most part. Fair Warning my have been their best writing, album wise. Then they come up with a mostly cover album ? Don't get that for the most part. Hey I think it's a great album. It's classic Van Halen. But I would rather listen to the new one. Songs that should have been on that one. It's all good.