Dave & Dave Unchained VH Podcast

[ZahZoo]

Check the last hour of this podcast out. Some unidentified insider... lot of differing takes from 85 when Dave quit/didn't quit, reunion tours, 96 recordings, 2004 tour Dave turned down due to Ed's lack of sobriety so VH went with Hagar... Dave's health issues... 2007/8 reunion, ADKOT sessions... Interesting takes and twists.

https://www.spreaker.com/user/daveanddaveunchained/ddu-episode-78-june-2022-2

[Vinnie Velvet]

Listened to this yesterday and yeah very interesting.

Seems to line up everything about Dave and the Van Halens relationship throughout the years.

And yes confirms that Alex hates Sam.

[Vinnie Velvet]

I think the 1985 thing makes sense.

Which is why Dave always said that they could "reconvene somewhere down the line".

He never realized that there would be a Van Halen without him. Sure Ed would get another singer but not release it under the Van Halen name. Of course thats not what happened.

[twonabomber]

Very interesting last hour.

[Terry]

Seems a bit odd that the source wouldn't go on record as to who they were. Perhaps the person had signed a confidentiality agreement back then, and is possibly concerned about a potential libel lawsuit?

Even if the person was in a position to have a firsthand perspective on some or all of the Van Halen related events from the 1985 breakup to the ADKOT album - a not insubstantial span of time - a lot of those happenings took place 20 + years ago. The passage of that amount of time can potentially alter perspectives, sometimes making events clearer in hindsight, other times casting a shadow of vagueness over happenings long gone.

I couldn't say Roth would have been amiss to believe that maybe the Van Halens wouldn't be able to get their act together when he left the band in 1985. I never got the sense from what Roth said publicly during that period that he hoped they wouldn't, and [Roth] wouldn't have been the only person to think that Van Halen wasn't necessarily going to have the level of commercial success they did when he left. Then again, I never got the sense that Dave wanted to leave Van Halen in 1985, but for a variety of reasons the band just wasn't able to function anymore.

I hadn't heard about Dave turning down the 2004 tour before, but it would make sense that touring must have been a consideration in light of the rehearsals and recordings Dave made with the band in...was it 2001? I think it was 2001 that Dave got back with the band again and they worked up some new material. I may be wrong about the year...was it 2000? I used to have better command of the narrative in terms of having the dates committed to memory. Anyway, whenever it was, I'd be sort of interested in hearing about that attempt at reuniting. Mostly because what little info has surfaced has been just a few brief and vague utterances, as opposed to the 1996 thing which was more fleshed out re: behind the scenes in comparison. There again, though, I hadn't heard about the Mitch Malloy 1996 thing until a decade or so after it happened.

It seems to me that Dave was cautious enough in 2007 to make sure that Ed was in a condition to play reasonably well. Cautious enough to agree delaying the tour until Ed sobered up. I can't say if Ed's 2007 rehab was spearheaded by Roth insisting Ed sober up, or Ed wanting to sober up, or Ed's son urging Ed to sober up, or maybe Azoff getting pressure from promoters to demonstrate that Ed had sobered up before the tour would be booked. Or the combination of all those factors. It wouldn't be unreasonable to conclude that since Dave was upping his game in 2007 in terms of preparation and rehearsal he would want to be assured that Ed was doing the same. Sure, Dave wanted a reunion, but I'd imagine he wouldn't want to willingly go into a reunion if Ed was a mess. I don't think Hagar particularly wanted to front a reunion with Ed in an underperforming condition, either. The difference was that by his own admission Hagar saw all the warning signs and went ahead anyway. Maybe Dave saw some of those same warning signs in 2000/2001, realized that the entire band wouldn't be firing on all cylinders and made the call that it would be better not to have a reunion at all if it wasn't going to live up to expectations.

Who knows? With so much of what the band undertook from 2000 onward, it was done with a comparatively minimal amount of public disclosure from the band themselves in terms of updating the fanbase as to what was happening. Mike Anthony hasn't said much about 2000-2004 in interviews, which overall is fine with me. Partly because what what one was able to glimpse and learn about those years was saddening to hear, Hagar's book being a case in point. Yeah, in a car crash rubbernecking way Hagar's stories about Ed's behavior were of interest, but ultimately it was pretty sad to see Ed going down the tubes like that.

Which is kind of my overall take on the insider accounts of Van Halen that have surfaced over the years, in that there is this juxtaposition between how listening to the music made me feel vs. the backstage accounts of how the music was made. It reminds me of the metaphor of the little boy who runs off to join the circus, in that it's one thing to sit in the audience and marvel at the spectacle and an eye-opener when you get a glimpse of what goes on behind the scenes, elephant shit and all. As a teen in the 1980s, I had an understandably naive view about how rock bands interacted. The image is that of a group of guys unified and united in harmony to make great music, so I figured it just must be that way with the members of a band all the time. That probably was never the case even with bands that stayed together for decades like, say, Rush: that band had periods of creative tension between Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson over the amount of keyboards used on their albums in the mid to late 1980s. And those were two guys who seemingly enjoyed one another's company far more than Dave and Eddie did. Then you throw in drugs, alcohol, egos, wrangling over publishing rights, commercial pressures, lifestyle differences, disagreements over image...kind of more surprising to me that the Roth-fronted Van Halen lasted as long as they did than them breaking up in 1985.

[Vinnie Velvet]

Rest assured, we can agree that yes its true Ed Leffler made a better deal for Van Hagar that made them more money. He was a manager that knew what he was doing. Something CVH really needed.

If OU812 tanked, we can also all agree Ed and Al wouldve dumped Sam in a heartbeat and called up Dave. Even when by that point Al - maybe lesser extent Ed - it seems weren't crazy about Sam according to this insider but the money they were making was too good.

[ZahZoo]

2000 - 2002 saw the aftermath of VH III and there was still some hope of things going somewhere... plus the band in general didn't fully hate their fans. 2002 though... saw Ed's cancer journey start and his divorce from Val. That's when the wheels fell completely off.

I recall that time period from when the internet fan sites and the band's official site were quite busy and growing. Michael Anthony was the only band member that had any public presence and he did a few get togethers at some Mexican restaurant. He was trying keep the VH torch lit while Ed was literally pissing on it.

2004 was a mess and if Roth was indeed approached it was wise he passed on it... I recall that interview during rehearsals where Ed was showing off his guitar neck where he marked which key each fret was... because he was too drunk most the time to remember... sad.

2004-2006 was Ed's porn period... another forgettable period musically. I think his relationship with Janie grounded some things and the Smithsonian recognition helped put Ed on a better path. Thankful all those forces and Wolfgang got Ed onto a better place that gave us the 2007/8 reunion and an album.

[Never was]

It seems the trauma from the initial split w Dave colored so much the rest of the band history and how they interacted with everyone. The brothers seem to lack some of the tools on their own to deal with life, and people despite being amazing artists. Great art is seldom created by well balanced folks

[Vinnie Velvet]

I say the band doesn't breakup in '85 if they had actual professional management.

By the time Monk was dumped, the band was sputtering out of control. There was no one to help steer the band through this turbulent time. If CVH had proper management, they would've convinced Edward to make 5150 as his solo album. Bring whatever singer you want. Dont call it Van Halen. Ensure that everyone was under a contract of sorts and move on.

Have CVH reconvene by 1987 for a new release in '88.

Too bad things didnt unfold that way.

[Terry]

I'd have to agree with ZahZoo in that generally speaking I too was still hopeful Van Halen would do something decent in the immediate wake of Cherone's departure in...was it the fall of 1999 that Cherone left?

I can't remember now when the rumors first surfaced that Dave had gotten back with the band in 2001, or when Roth confirmed that he had gotten back with the band in 2001...actually, I just confirmed that it was 2000 that Dave got back
with the band. And it was a year later in 2001 that both Dave and Mike confirmed said reunion had taken place a year earlier. THAT is why I kept thinking 2001.

But, yeah, Cherone leaves in 1999 and it took Van Halen nearly 5 years before they hit the road again with Hagar. And I was like, it took them half a decade just to fob off a few new songs with Hagar and do a Sam Halen reunion?

And even after Dave finally started working with the band again in late 2006, Dave was working with Van Halen for nearly a decade when that 2015 tour concluded. And they managed to do three tours and an album in that span of time.
I mean, it took them 5 years after Dave rejoined to put out ADKOT (I don't even count that Tokyo Dome album, because that thing just smacked of being hastily thrown out there).

Part of the thing for me was perhaps being able to remember when Dave was initially in Van Halen, and they were basically doing an album and tour every year, so while I wasn't expecting THAT pace circa 2007 I was kinda hopeful
they would be more productive in terms of studio stuff.

However, sort of along the lines of probably having been lucky the CVH lineup lasted as long as it did, eventually I kinda came around to thinking that when I took into account the various illnesses, the wear and tear of age, the egos
involved, the addiction factor and the rest of it...I was probably lucky to have seen Dave back with the band at all, because after that 2004 Hagar tour and Ed's general physical appearance in 2004, 2005 and 2006...I mean, it's terrible
to say, but I honestly thought toward the end of 2006 that Eddie was gonna drop dead at any minute...and I didn't really think at the end of 2006 that Dave was really up to fronting Van Halen in arenas in a way that wouldn't be
embarrassing to watch.

But they put it together. It wasn't perfect. There were rough spots. Overall, though, what they managed to reconstruct was just about the best they could do considering everything everyone had been through.

Dave was great on that first reunion tour.

Ed reconstituted his mojo by the time that 2nd reunion tour rolled around: I remember watching them playing Girl Gone Bad on that tour and literally getting chills because Ed was so good.

[Nitro Express]

Seems a bit odd that the source wouldn't go on record as to who they were. Perhaps the person had signed a confidentiality agreement back then, and is possibly concerned about a potential libel lawsuit?

Even if the person was in a position to have a firsthand perspective on some or all of the Van Halen related events from the 1985 breakup to the ADKOT album - a not insubstantial span of time - a lot of those happenings took place 20 + years ago. The passage of that amount of time can potentially alter perspectives, sometimes making events clearer in hindsight, other times casting a shadow of vagueness over happenings long gone.

I couldn't say Roth would have been amiss to believe that maybe the Van Halens wouldn't be able to get their act together when he left the band in 1985. I never got the sense from what Roth said publicly during that period that he hoped they wouldn't, and [Roth] wouldn't have been the only person to think that Van Halen wasn't necessarily going to have the level of commercial success they did when he left. Then again, I never got the sense that Dave wanted to leave Van Halen in 1985, but for a variety of reasons the band just wasn't able to function anymore.

I hadn't heard about Dave turning down the 2004 tour before, but it would make sense that touring must have been a consideration in light of the rehearsals and recordings Dave made with the band in...was it 2001? I think it was 2001 that Dave got back with the band again and they worked up some new material. I may be wrong about the year...was it 2000? I used to have better command of the narrative in terms of having the dates committed to memory. Anyway, whenever it was, I'd be sort of interested in hearing about that attempt at reuniting. Mostly because what little info has surfaced has been just a few brief and vague utterances, as opposed to the 1996 thing which was more fleshed out re: behind the scenes in comparison. There again, though, I hadn't heard about the Mitch Malloy 1996 thing until a decade or so after it happened.

It seems to me that Dave was cautious enough in 2007 to make sure that Ed was in a condition to play reasonably well. Cautious enough to agree delaying the tour until Ed sobered up. I can't say if Ed's 2007 rehab was spearheaded by Roth insisting Ed sober up, or Ed wanting to sober up, or Ed's son urging Ed to sober up, or maybe Azoff getting pressure from promoters to demonstrate that Ed had sobered up before the tour would be booked. Or the combination of all those factors. It wouldn't be unreasonable to conclude that since Dave was upping his game in 2007 in terms of preparation and rehearsal he would want to be assured that Ed was doing the same. Sure, Dave wanted a reunion, but I'd imagine he wouldn't want to willingly go into a reunion if Ed was a mess. I don't think Hagar particularly wanted to front a reunion with Ed in an underperforming condition, either. The difference was that by his own admission Hagar saw all the warning signs and went ahead anyway. Maybe Dave saw some of those same warning signs in 2000/2001, realized that the entire band wouldn't be firing on all cylinders and made the call that it would be better not to have a reunion at all if it wasn't going to live up to expectations.

Who knows? With so much of what the band undertook from 2000 onward, it was done with a comparatively minimal amount of public disclosure from the band themselves in terms of updating the fanbase as to what was happening. Mike Anthony hasn't said much about 2000-2004 in interviews, which overall is fine with me. Partly because what what one was able to glimpse and learn about those years was saddening to hear, Hagar's book being a case in point. Yeah, in a car crash rubbernecking way Hagar's stories about Ed's behavior were of interest, but ultimately it was pretty sad to see Ed going down the tubes like that.

Which is kind of my overall take on the insider accounts of Van Halen that have surfaced over the years, in that there is this juxtaposition between how listening to the music made me feel vs. the backstage accounts of how the music was made. It reminds me of the metaphor of the little boy who runs off to join the circus, in that it's one thing to sit in the audience and marvel at the spectacle and an eye-opener when you get a glimpse of what goes on behind the scenes, elephant shit and all. As a teen in the 1980s, I had an understandably naive view about how rock bands interacted. The image is that of a group of guys unified and united in harmony to make great music, so I figured it just must be that way with the members of a band all the time. That probably was never the case even with bands that stayed together for decades like, say, Rush: that band had periods of creative tension between Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson over the amount of keyboards used on their albums in the mid to late 1980s. And those were two guys who seemingly enjoyed one another's company far more than Dave and Eddie did. Then you throw in drugs, alcohol, egos, wrangling over publishing rights, commercial pressures, lifestyle differences, disagreements over image...kind of more surprising to me that the Roth-fronted Van Halen lasted as long as they did than them breaking up in 1985.

Unamed VH insider sources is much like the good ol PENTHOUSE FORUM. You knew it was bullshit but you read it anyways and enjoyed it.

[Nitro Express]

Wolfgang has been pretty honest about his dad. They wanted to get Ed on the road even when he was in a bad state hoping the responsibility of a tour and doing shows would snap him out of it. Ed was a professional and took what he did seriously even if everything else in his life was fucked up but sadly it didn't work and Ed was a sad freak show that tour. It might be true Dave had the integrity not to do it but Sam being the slime ball he is did and then he told the public all the dirt about Ed which now he claims he regrets. Whatever Sam. You are just a slimy opportunist and if you liked suits you would be a politician.

Wolfgang also said his dad did get laid up due to a motorcycle accident so Deep Throat does have some things right or they might know those things because they listened to a few Wolfgang interviews.

[Nitro Express]

I say the band doesn't breakup in '85 if they had actual professional management.

By the time Monk was dumped, the band was sputtering out of control. There was no one to help steer the band through this turbulent time. If CVH had proper management, they would've convinced Edward to make 5150 as his solo album. Bring whatever singer you want. Dont call it Van Halen. Ensure that everyone was under a contract of sorts and move on.

Have CVH reconvene by 1987 for a new release in '88.

Too bad things didnt unfold that way.

Miles Copeland said the biggest enemy of an act is themselves. Acts self destruct and often a manager can't stop it; especially, if it's substance abuse issues which Van Halen was having problems with. But you make a great point. I always maintained what kept Van Halen going for a bit was they got great management when Sammy's manager took over and look at what happened to that band when that manager passed away.

Van Halen couldn't manage it's way out of a paper bag on it's own.

[Nitro Express]

Anyways Van Halen the band died in 1984. Everything that came after paled in comparison. By the time Roth got back fronting them he was too old and really the only reason to see them was to see Eddie play but for most the 2000's that wasn't even worth seeing. At least Ed had one good tour before he went. It was like seeing Babe Ruth hit one last home run.

[Nitro Express]

Thing's kind of went to shit after the year 2,000. This hasn't been a good century so far.