The Beginning of the End of Classic Van HALEN

[Nickdfresh]

Was the premature release, and unexpected success of the single "Pretty Woman" the causality of the eventual downfall of Classic Van HALEN?

Think of the following:

-Van Halen had just finished a grueling tour in support of 1981's FAIR WARNING.

They were expecting some well earned time off, but released "Pretty Woman" to tide their fan base over until the next project.

"Pretty Woman" did well enough that Van Halen was pushed to strike while the iron was hot by Warner Bros., and follow up FAIR WARNING with DIVER DOWN prematurely and embark on another long world tour.


Did Van Halen burn out as a result? Did they hit the wall? Did the DIVER DOWN episode ultimately set the stage for their growing tensions and ROTH's departure in 1985?

[POJO_Risin]

Personally...I think the growing tension started in 1974/75...

I think these guys were fucked up enough to overlook it through all this shit...

I see your point though...and I do think that this song...and subsequent album pushed up a lot of the tensions...as it did open up a lot of preferences...and a battle for the frontline of this band...

it came to a head in 1984...

you've brought up some valid points...

[academic punk]

Ed was talking about quitting before Fair Warning.

It could be argued that Pretty Woman and its success didn't hasten the band's demise, but maybe gave them new life (if not admiration for one another), and sustained the bands existence for that crucial little bit longer.

If they had taken the time off, Ed may have had sufficient time to become reflective, and start looking around and playing wiht other musicians, and maybe even finally convinced Gene Simmons that he IS second-rate enough to play in KISS.

[POJO_Risin]

I don't know AP...I think that was the beginning of Ed talking out of his ass...

there was talk during the mid 70's of Ed moving on the GREENER pastures...probably didn't because of anAL...

but I don't think spED ever wanted Roth in the band...but didn't have another route to take...and realized in his drunkenness that Dave brought an element to VH that they needed...

what he didn't like was that everyone thought HE was VH...

hell...everyone still does.

I don't think spED has a reflective bone in his body...if he did...Roth would have been back in 1996...

[academic punk]

Point taken.

But maybe the success of Pretty Woman, and the subsequent rush of productivity was good for the band b/c if it hadn't happened Ed may have had time to either a) become Michael Jackson' full-time guitarist, and b) all that time-off could've caused Ed to drink himself to death.

[POJO_Risin]

Either or...lmfao...there COULDN'T have been reflection...

Either he's a fucking idiot and with a fag...

or he's dead...

maybe would have made all the later shit easier...

[academic punk]

Would've been best for the band's legacy!

[Nickdfresh]

Some facts about "Pretty Woman":


a.) Reached number 12 on the Billboard Pop Charts and number three on the Rock chart.

b.) First concept video Van HALEN ever made.

c.) Was not intended to be on an album, but was a stand alone single release.

d.) Video was initially banned by MTV because of the transvestite 'heroine.'

e.) Was record in January of 1982. DIVER DOWN followed, being released on April 14, 1982.


f.) DIVER DOWN has sold over four million copies as of 1998.



Sources:

http://www.songfacts.com/detail.lasso?id=1474

http://www.classicvanhalen.com/albums_dd.shtml

[POJO_Risin]

lmfao...I can see a slew of "Should spED have died threads" coming back as we speak...

I don't think the fucker should have died...but...in the same respect...I think when you are at the top of the game...better decisions could have been made by everyone...

The end of what could have been the greatest band of all time IN EVERYONE'S eyes...ended in 1985...unfortunate...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by academic punk
Would've been best for the band's legacy!

I keep thinking of that plane returning form GERMANY circa September/October 1984 plowing into the side of a mountain.

We the fans could then have had numerous sightings of David LEE ROTH driving a bus in Africa. (And perhaps of EDDIE in an alleyway swinging from a brown paper bag).:)

[academic punk]

No, y'see, if Ed had drank himself to death, Dave could've really turned that into grounds for eventually shedding the clown image (not that I have any prob whatsoever with Dave; humor: it's my favorite thing about him), and really becoming an honest to God full-time blues man.

The public would have seen right out in front the stuff that Dave has always kept a very tight-seal on for his public persona.

[Nickdfresh]

Actually, I'd kill to hear what a seventh album with DAVE on vocals would have sounded like.

I seriously think they could have rivaled The ROLLING STONES had they not imploded...

Now they're fighting Journey for bargin bin space.

[Rikk]

I think VAN HALEN was a classic struggle for control from the very beginning. I think you can look at the six-pack and see the tensions and the control-shift just by looking at the albums the boys made.

Start at VAN HALEN I. Frankly, it's the most unified effort. Everybody knew they were making THE album...their first one. So they just played their classic catalogue. No need for tension because everyone was getting what they want. (Of course, only later does Alex claim little things like: "The album was ruined because the bass drum mic wasn't on for certain songs" or "We had plenty of original material and didn't need ICE CREAM MAN"). For Dave, it was the ultimate party album. For Eddie, it was introducing the world to his sound. Of course, Eddie didn't stop and think about this. For him it was "Yes sir, Mr. Producer, sir."

Second album...this is more Dave and Ted's show. Personally, I think it's the better album. But not because of YOU'RE NO GOOD or DANCE THE NIGHT AWAY. I like DANCE THE NIGHT AWAY, but it's clear that the first two songs on this album are Dave and Ted's attempt at greater commercial success. Al was public at the time with the thought that the album should have had more moments like LIGHT UP THE SKY. Even better song...but if Al had made all the decisions, he'd still be playing clubs. (Well, I guess he will be again, won't he?)

Third album: Ed starts to finally take control. This is clearly a more Ed-influenced album. But Dave is really loosening up in the studio. Unclear who has control here...but Ed sounds a little happier. He realized that he can make more self-indulgent compositions...but Dave retorts by putting funny little raps over guitar licks instead of standard vocal melodies. The tension is definitely building...

FAIR WARNING. Ed explodes. Wants to leave the band. He's sick of the band's direction. I think he looked at bands like KISS and saw some sort of heavy metal integrity (a lot of horseshit if you ask me...KISS was more directionless than ever in the early 80s), and saw his own band as a cabaret act he didn't want to be part of. Anyway, he took control by making threats. They tried it his way. A brilliant album came out...Dave toned down the antics a bit...the album was based more on Ed's guitar and pushing the envelope. The result: their least successful effort. Dave and Ted get control again.

DIVER DOWN. The band records a single just for fun. It become a big hit...they throw together an album. With little time to think and not many new compositions, they end up recording a bunch of covers (at Dave's and Ted's insistence) instead of filling the entire album with older unreleased VH compositions. Songs like BIG TROUBLE are left to the side. They try it Dave and Ted's way...it does very well. The tension is at a peak...Ed feels trapped.

1984. I still feel this is the band's most brilliant record. I know most of you disagree. The point is, it's definitely the ultimate push-and-pull experience. Ed gets a studio...takes control. All original compositions...most of 'em brand-spankin' new. Dave finds a way to still commercialize many of 'em...Ted guarantees that the album has its commercial singles while still disagreeing that songs like HOUSE OF PAIN or 1984 should be on there. In the end, everyone wins...Ed has his moment of glory, the album is a huge success...but who does everyone love? Uh oh...everyone loves Dave.

So even when Ed was right...Dave is right. The band aren't allowed to finish almost anything in the studio again because Ed is left with the bigger resentment...

End of Van Halen.

Pretty neat theory, eh?

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Nah, I hear both of you guys, but I don't think the release of "Pretty Woman" in itself was any type of catalyst of a breakup....

Yes, it's well known that DD was rushed into production, and it was for that specific reason that there are so many cover songs on it....

But it's also well known that they had an extremely successful DD tour, followed by the US Festival....

In my view, the beginning of the end was the COMBINATION of situations that happened in the production and subsequent tour of 1984...

- I think that although Ed had sporadically played keyboards throughout the CVH existence, the 1984 album had 3 songs on it that were predominately keyboards (1984, Jump, I'll Wait).... And as Dave has always said, he was categorically AGAINST featuring Ed's keyboards... And if you remember, the 1984 tour, not only had Ed's keyboard prominantly displayed onstage, he even played the Jump solo on keyboards....

- Under the assumption of Ed's "it's about the music" and "I'm a musician", I have a good feeling that Ed's disdain for Dave's antics onstage reached a pinnacle during that tour... If you remember, Dave had a twirling ribbon, twirling baton, and martial arts scene at different times during the show.... And as we all know that "that's Dave", I think that Ed thought it was turning more into a circus than a rock concert....

- I will grant you that the VIDEO for Pretty Woman, combined with the videos for HFT and Panama, were probably too silly for Ed's "musician" taste....

Anyway, just my .02 cents....

[Rikk]

Originally posted by Va Beach VH Fan
- Under the assumption of Ed's "it's about the music" and "I'm a musician", I have a good feeling that Ed's disdain for Dave's antics onstage reached a pinnacle during that tour... If you remember, Dave had a twirling ribbon, twirling baton, and martial arts scene at different times during the show.... And as we all know that "that's Dave", I think that Ed thought it was turning more into a circus than a rock concert....

That's it, in a nutshell, for me anyway. It think it was a bigger issue than the symbol of what PRETTY WOMAN was. It went back to the beginning...but by the 1984 tour, the struggle versus supposed musical integrity to Dave's showmanship was at its peak, and finding common ground once more was impossible.

[POJO_Risin]

Personally...

we are all discounting Dave's getting pissed off the Ed and the band didn't want to tour like 1984 anymore...

I have a Japanese interview in which Dave was still with the band. the Japanese bitch asked him when the band was going to tour...and Dave said. "I have no idea." I'm just sitting here waiting for them to do something. I'd do it right now, but the rest of the band doesn't want to tour. This interview I think was in early 1985...right after the EP was released...

honestly...

I think Dave had a whole fucking bunch of thoughts about where the band could go...would go...after he did his thing. I think the band resented his thing. I think Dave figured his thing would do nothing but help the band. I think Ed resented Dave because he could have a "his thing..." while Ed's thing was with gay ass Michael Jackson...and if you recall...Ed bitched and moaned about people doing other shit...so did Dave for that matter...but after Thriller...it opened up. Dave did his thing...but always with the intent of going right back into the studio to do a VH album...that he assumed would be part of the soundtrack to his movie...or...other music for it.

Ed realized that the "pull" this time...would be far more towards Dave's side...and more than likely...cut the string...

Dave was willing and ready to roll with another album...was willing and ready to tour...and tour forever...

Ed was to fucking busy worried about perception...

I think EVERYTHING we've mentioned is more than likely true to a certain extent...

[academic punk]

I think Ed found himself strangely aroused by the transvestite in the PW video, and the trauma finally caused him to crack...

[Matt White]

I do think that DIVER DOWN pushed things in the wrong direction...Warner Bros should have cut them some slack.

But, I came across something strange in the VAN HALEN ENCYCLOPEDIA......

Talks about VAN HALEN II, and how the idea was to showcase AVH & Mike more, since EVH was so heavy on VHI. So, originally, EVH wasn't seen as this "musical genius" and the "core" of the band...as so many of our Wooly compadres would have us believe.

[Rikk]

Originally posted by POJO_Risin
I think EVERYTHING we've mentioned is more than likely true to a certain extent...

Yep. It's about 100 different things. I think the tensions I named were pretty much just the musical/image ones. But there were personal problems that added to this (I still don't know if the story with Alex's wife is true or not), and I think part of the reason the band didn't want to tour was because they didn't want another tour of listening to Dave's raps and watching him swing a sword around (backstage as well...LOL).

Sometimes, if I've spent an entire summer hanging out with certain friends, I look at 'em and realize that I just don't want to be around them for a while, and I have no idea why (or maybe some idea). I think Dave felt this. Ed was hurt, but angered even more because he had allegedly been biting HIS tongue long enough, so Ed made the split the final thing it was. For Dave, it was more of a break.

It's funny...but that's exactly what happened with THE BEATLES. I was just reading a new magazine with 200 pages of Beatles interviews and articles from the 1970s after the split, and it seems there is no one reason they broke up. It was musical. It was personal. It was business. It was about image. It was about album direction. Things just came to a head. And just as some VH fans consider 1984 the band's masterpiece, some BEATLES fans consider ABBEY ROAD the band's masterpiece. Anyway, the other interesting thing that parallels VH is: when the BEATLES broke up, John Lennon left quietly. He indicated that it was a split, but didn't treat it as completely permanent and insinuated that they should all release albums on the same label and still be business partners. McCartney, hurt beyond belief, finally made the split public and was very vocal about it being PERMANENT. It was McCartney that made it a business split as well, suing the other Beatles. And he made an album declaring his independence before the others, with a press release stating the same. Furthermore, within a couple of years, John and Ringo were both stating that they would like the group to get together again. But it's Paul that was more negative about this in the years following the break-up. Few people remember this. Anyway, it really resembles VH's history, with Paul as Eddie and John as Dave.

[Nickdfresh]

I dunno.' You guys (VA & RIKK) make some great points, but personally I think the seed to perennial destruction was laid in the rushed to market production of DIVER DOWN. At least symbolically. It's a great, fun album, but as POJO pointed out in his first post; there was always that conflict of persona between live showmanship and of the musicianship. VAN HALEN was trying to be catchy and kitschy at the same time they were trying to break the ground of the their rock and roll forebears. I think part of the problem is the 80's itself. It was a time when the visual over took the auditory and the music in itself mattered less. Perhaps if Van HALEN had hit it big in 1974 instead of 1978, they may have reconciled the conflicts that beset them and had some real longevity. Perhaps they could have transitioned into the "video age" (like the Stones did) instead of being kicked into it forcefully, kicking and screaming at a time when they were still really developing...

But the fact that this band was pushed to capitalize on their popularity when they were exhausted and burned out with the road and each other, it must have played a part in the ultimate downfall.

I think if you listen to a lot of the boots between the 1982-83' "Hide Your Sheep Tour" and the "1984 Tour, you can see a clear pattern of a band that goes from a happy-go-lucky, party band that is at the height of their creative power and in control (except for when the alcohol gets flowing a little too much at gigs like The US Festival) to a band that rushes things, and is professionally playing things out. When I hear 1984 boots, I hear a band that is rushing things so they can get out of there, and a band that is putting in pre-fabricated performances that are to their credit, full of energy. But it is a nervous energy that is sort of spastic and unfocussed. I think this band hit the wall at the precipices of their greatness in 1982, and never quite recovered...

[academic punk]

Originally posted by Matt White


Talks about VAN HALEN II, and how the idea was to showcase AVH & Mike more, since EVH was so heavy on VHI. So, originally, EVH wasn't seen as this "musical genius" and the "core" of the band...as so many of our Wooly compadres would have us believe.

I think that was just in reference to MIke hardly even being able to be HEARD on the first disc.

And, hey, what opens the album? Mike's crappy bass solo. But he IS heard much greater on stuff like "Beautiful Girls" and "Light Up The Sky".

I know one of the reasons stuff on WACF was approached as it was to show another side of Dave. Souful stuff like the intro to "Fools", the bluesier "TYWH", and the acoustic, light, frolicky "CTBM?", and even the melodicism of "IASR" were all Ted's design for building and displaying another side to the musician's - all of them - on each album.

[Va Beach VH Fan]

Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I dunno.' You guys (VA & RIKK) make some great points

Fucking right I did, I'm all about quality buddy.... ;)


Originally posted by Nickdfresh
I think if you listen to a lot of the boots between the 1982-83' "Hide Your Sheep Tour" and the "1984 Tour, you can see a clear pattern of a band that goes from a happy-go-lucky, party band that is at the height of their creative power and in control (except for when the alcohol gets flowing a little too much at gigs like The US Festival) to a band that rushes things, and is professionally playing things out. When I hear 1984 boots, I hear a band that is rushing things so they can get out of there, and a band that is putting in pre-fabricated performances that are to their credit, full of energy. But it is a nervous energy that is sort of spastic and unfocussed. I think this band hit the wall at the precipices of their greatness in 1982, and never quite recovered...

I think you just concurred with what I said about the '84 tour....

Especially Unchained, terribly too fast....

[Matt White]

Originally posted by academic punk
I think that was just in reference to MIke hardly even being able to be HEARD on the first disc.

And, hey, what opens the album? Mike's crappy bass solo. But he IS heard much greater on stuff like "Beautiful Girls" and "Light Up The Sky".

I know one of the reasons stuff on WACF was approached as it was to show another side of Dave. Souful stuff like the intro to "Fools", the bluesier "TYWH", and the acoustic, light, frolicky "CTBM?", and even the melodicism of "IASR" were all Ted's design for building and displaying another side to the musician's - all of them - on each album.

He says in the book that MIKE's solo that opens "Your No GOOD" was, originally, like 10 minutes long. And that AVH was to have a drum solo.
When is the last time the VH rthym section was ever given any consideration? This was it!!!

[academic punk]

I think moreso than anything else, it was just the band growing up.

They were all married at this point - but for Dave. So it's not the only thing in the other guys lives anymore, and maybe the backstage scene no longer holds the same thrill it once did.

So all that comraderie is gone, and with that, the unity of vision for the band. Then Mrs. Anthony is sitting there going "YOU, you're really the star of this band." Straight out of Spinal Tap.

Whatever was going on otherwise, that only exasperate this situation.

Remember how close you were to your pals in high school? sudden;y, they've got a sife, kids, mortgages...new priorities.

As dave even said in the book, backstage sudden;y became him and the midgets.

[academic punk]

Originally posted by Matt White
He says in the book taht MIKE's solo that opens "Your No GOOD" was, originally, like 10 minutes long. And that AVH was to have a drum solo.
When is the last time the VH rthym section was ever given any consideration? This was it!!!

I would sooner drop dead than sit through 10 minutes of Mike Anthony attempting a solo...

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Va Beach VH Fan
Fucking right I did, I'm all about quality buddy.... ;)



I think you just concurred with what I said about the '84 tour....

Especially Unchained, terribly too fast....

I do agree that "Unchained" was played way too quickly.

You know, some songs sound great when they're speeded up a little live (KIZZ's "Cold Gin" comes to mind).

"Unchained" is definitely not one of them!

I also think they waded through "Everybody Wants Some" with a combination of lethargy and a too-quick paced up-tempo. I also think DAVE could have ditched the whole monologue in the middle he did every night.

[Roth & Roll]

Originally posted by POJO_Risin
Personally...

we are all discounting Dave's getting pissed off the Ed and the band didn't want to tour like 1984 anymore...

I have a Japanese interview in which Dave was still with the band. the Japanese bitch asked him when the band was going to tour...and Dave said. "I have no idea." I'm just sitting here waiting for them to do something. I'd do it right now, but the rest of the band doesn't want to tour. This interview I think was in early 1985...right after the EP was released...

honestly...

I think Dave had a whole fucking bunch of thoughts about where the band could go...would go...after he did his thing. I think the band resented his thing. I think Dave figured his thing would do nothing but help the band. I think Ed resented Dave because he could have a "his thing..." while Ed's thing was with gay ass Michael Jackson...and if you recall...Ed bitched and moaned about people doing other shit...so did Dave for that matter...but after Thriller...it opened up. Dave did his thing...but always with the intent of going right back into the studio to do a VH album...that he assumed would be part of the soundtrack to his movie...or...other music for it.

Ed realized that the "pull" this time...would be far more towards Dave's side...and more than likely...cut the string...

Dave was willing and ready to roll with another album...was willing and ready to tour...and tour forever...

Ed was to fucking busy worried about perception...

Word.

[Matt White]

Yup...

EVH with that "I wasn't gonna wait around on his ass!" routine! After takin' a year to make a record!
It's incredible that the guy who is acknowledged to have been in charge during their PEEK years is looked upon with such disdain & hatred. Those basturds are so jealous of DAVE it practically oozes out of 'em!

[ben halen]

Not sure why it happened. I just know it's like any other divorce.

US KIDS ARE ALWAYS THE ONES THAT HAVE TO SUFFER!!!

[audiospectrum]

Oh yeah Rikk very nice!!
In fact all these posts are 100% believable and all of these theories are probably true.
Besides what everyone else has said, I think it comes down to the personal side of the four members. Dave had a real go-getter approach to life and was ALWAYS looking to push the boundaries and he knew he had the firepower to do this (Ed was THE greatest, and Al and Mike were a formidable rhythm section). I could picture Dave getting up every morning early for running, stretching, yoga, Zen meditation, weights and whatever else, while Eddie and the boys were struggling to keep themselves clean personally. And I think that it has to do with their fucking wives. Dave was quoted as saying that the mood switched in 1980 (WACF) when Val came along, she's a turd, a ditzy glamourized and very unintelligent person. Hey man she had a pretty face and that is what killed off Ed. And take it from me, I'm oly just starting to get over a similar relationship that I blindly dove into four years ago. These women are very smart in keeping you attached and blind!! So I figure that Dave was pissed off that Ed didn't set his standards high enough, but this is understandable considering they didn't really have a father. So the personal choices really fucked with the creative side of things, and it definantely fucked with the perceptions that they had, even with Dave to some extent. And thus, this affected their ability to do the daily things to keep it all real, to get into their own personal grooves. The minds didn't stop, the tours kept coming, the pressure kept rising. It's an unfair world and Dave saw it like this, that's why he was trekking off to nowhere!! Always looking for the ultimate balance. The brothers didn't see and still don't see how important the balance is.
And it's funny how the 1995 Hagar album was called Balance, what a crock of shit, you wanna learn about balance, learn about David Lee Roth. In my darkest times, Dave has given me the strength and balance that I've needed to get up and at em, again, again, again, again!!!!!

[zeronumber]

Meh, I think it's more of the time period of Diver down, and pre 1984 release. Metal had quickly grew in popularity, and hugely into mainstream pop-culture due to the growth of mtv, and an age willing to accept the rock scene from the L.A. Strip.

It was a time were most bands felt top of the world and ego's flaired...
And let's face it, Van Halen was top of the world, and they let success get to their heads.

1984 was overall a bad time for VH, Eddie quickly rose to the top of the class, being considered the best guitarist of the time, being recognized the best and let it get to his head. Dave just had major success with his ep and both felt that they were top of the world after the success of 1984. By 1985, they both wanted to do more, but deep inside...felt as though they didn't need each other. Dave wanted to tour and be in the spotlight, and the rest of the band wanted to take it easy, ego's flared, and the parties went their seperate ways.

[TOM_5150]

I think VH was at the height of their creativity when they split. Just put on 1984 and you'll know what I mean.

[DavidLeeNatra]

Originally posted by ben halen
Not sure why it happened. I just know it's like any other divorce.

US KIDS ARE ALWAYS THE ONES THAT HAVE TO SUFFER!!!

5 stars for that post...

I guess pojo is right...the tension started with building the band in 1974/75...dave was the "new guy" and became the leader...it seems they have always been a 3+1 group and not four guys driving the same road...

[Terry]

Think it was when Jump became such a huge single. If Ed is to be taken at his word, Roth never thought it was what VH shouold be doing, while Ed pushed to have that and I'll Wait on 1984.

Van Halen was big prior to the 1984 album, but that single and the vids really pushed the band into the stratosphere commercially.

I dunno. Think Ed just got tired of being told what to do by Dave, Ted and the management, or wanted to have some more control...maybe be able to assert himself more. Plus the sheer amount of meaningless guitar mag best rock guitarist polls he was winning probably went to his head.

Fair Warning was pretty much the apex of CVH for me. After that, the last two albums...well, let's just say they weren't without several skipworthy tracks on them. Although from what we read after the band split, seems we were lucky to have CVH together as long as they were in the first place, considering the ego and volatility of the persons involved.

[zeronumber]

I think the main problem was just the sheer amount of creative differences by both Dave and eddie. Dave sort of just wanted to stick to the cvh forumla of a hard rocking metal band, that occasionally spews out a few covers here and there...Eddie wanted to explore more terriotory as a musican that was thought to be "Taboo" for van halen, such as more work with clean/aucostic guitars, keyboard arrangements, Synth's and so on. I think the 1984 albulm brought that to an head, since two of the singles "Panama" and "Hot for Teacher" were both what dave and many cvh fans would consider better material, where as "Jump" showed eddie that the band could be as commercially accepted with or without guitars being the focal instruments.

I think 5150 and EEAS are proof postive of this. EEAS was mostly a hard rocking albulm, while 5150's singles "Why can't this be love" "Love walks in" and "Dreams" were very keyboard/synth driven.