[StealthBird]

The record industry (or what's left of it) is banking on this reunion generating some sales. There's a HUGE push for VH now, from playing their music on the radio, to being mentioned in magazines, to having new "lists" of the greatest hard rock bands, with an emphasis on VH. The usual marketing czars are whipping up the interest.

Van Halen were so different when they came out, but I have to admit, as they progressed into the Diver Down era, they sounded dated, and were recycling some of their material. Eddie's move to keyboards, while shunned by many fans, was the best thing for the band. They had FAR more success with Sammy Hagar than with Roth. Their music became more complex, more dynamic, and on occasion, was much harder than the pre-1984 era.

With Roth, no #1 albums. With Hagar, 4 consecutive #1 albums.

Sammy was about the only person that could replace a lead singer of major rock band, a singer as dynamic as Roth, and actually improve the group. But as talented as Hagar is, he's nowhere near the front man Roth was.

Roth was the epitome of rock and roll front men, one of the all time greats, up there with Jagger, Plant, and Tyler. The down side of Roth (other than he was corny, and an embarrassment at times during interviews) was that Roth was a weak lyricist. Luckily, the band was SO talented, his lyrics were often overlooked.

The original Van Halen were a shot in the arm of rock and roll when they came out. They changed the direction of rock music, and influenced an entire generation.

[img]<<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/beers.gif[/img]