If Eddie Van halen was never born, who would be the next Van Halen?

[bisticles]

 

 

 

I've seen hundreds of bands do uninspired Van Halen covers before. Props to Mayer for going all out and doing it with style.

[pigman]

Wouldn't the next Van Halen just be Alex?

[randombastage]

It wasn't Eddie's skill as a guitar slinger that put him where he is in total popularity it was the sum of all the parts in the band. So looking to find the replacement guitarslinger as 'who would have filled that role' is pointless. There were more technically proficient players out there at the time and they were then, and still are now, relatively obscure compared to the then amazing guitar player for the extremely hot new band called VanHalen....

 

It's like asking who would the next Paul McCartney have been if the Beatles never got together. Paul by himself never would have achieved the same status in spite of all of his skills and talent.

[twofoolsaminute]

Whatever guitarist ended up in David Lee Roth's band. I figure EVH would have ended up a sullen asshole playing in his daddy's garage if not for Dave promoting the band.

[Virgman]

That's it. Randombastage hit it.

 

Van Halen was an example of how the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.

 

Without the rest of the original cast Eddie is a nobody.

 

Don't agree? What has Eddie done since? Zip. Even with Sammy Hagar they were basically covering their past hits.

 

It's a shame Eddie is neurotic and can't get along with anyone but his brother.

 

Together the band was a powerhouse.

[timmay8612]

Who would be next? Hopefully nobody...

[jedisb]

 

 

 

So I guess they were able to sell at least one of those $25,000 Frankenstein replicas. (Or may Fender just gave it to him.)

[Oosell]

I would make a fair bet that it would be his younger brother.:poke:

[blood5150]

That's it. Randombastage hit it. Van Halen was an example of how the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Without the rest of the original cast Eddie is a nobody. Don't agree? What has Eddie done since? Zip. Even with Sammy Hagar they were basically covering their past hits. It's a shame Eddie is neurotic and can't get along with anyone but his brother. Together the band was a powerhouse.

 

 

 

I'm not a big Hagar fan but they did have 5 #1 albums with him.

[Fusion1]

The correct answer is George Lynch. If Dokken followed the same timeline as Van Halen and without Van Halen in the picture, Dokken and namely George Lynch would have been the Van Halen of that time.

[noisebloom]

This question pretty much comes down to which prominent guitar player of the early 80s era was the least influenced by EVH.

 

The obvious answers seem to be Rhoads or Malmsteen. Rhoads would have been a slightly different guitar player without EVH (for better or worse? -- an interesting question), because you could hear a little bit of VH's influence in Rhoads' attack, flashy style and tremolo habits. Malmsteen, however, was influenced very little if at all by EVH. He existed almost entirely outside of EVH's orbit. I think if EVH had never come on the scene, we would have seen almost exactly the same Malmsteen we first saw ca. 1983.

 

I'm less inclined to say George Lynch, because I think he was more influenced by EVH than Rhoads was. I could be wrong, but I think Lynch would have been a very different guitar player without EVH's presence.

[Slave2TheAudio]

 

 

Man, I am seriously liking John Mayer more and more. He can play anything and WELL.

[Fusion1]

 

This question pretty much comes down to which prominent guitar player of the early 80s era was the least influenced by EVH. The obvious answers seem to be Rhoads or Malmsteen. Rhoads would have been a slightly different guitar player without EVH (for better or worse? -- an interesting question), because you could hear a little bit of VH's influence in Rhoads' attack, flashy style and tremolo habits. Malmsteen, however, was influenced very little if at all by EVH. He existed almost entirely outside of EVH's orbit. I think if EVH had never come on the scene, we would have seen almost exactly the same Malmsteen we first saw ca. 1983. I'm less inclined to say George Lynch, because I think he was more influenced by EVH than Rhoads was. I could be wrong, but I think Lynch would have been a very different guitar player without EVH's presence.

 

 

I could see either one of them cfarrying on unfazed with or without Van Halen as they didn't seem to have a lot of influence from him anyways. That wasn't the question though. If Van Halen never existed, who would have been the band/ guitar player that would have filled that role? I still say George Lynch and Dokken. They were writing similar sounding hard rock in the early 80s and probably before that which makes them peers to VH not influenced by them.

 

Hell even Quiet Riot in the late 70s with Randy Rhodes was doing that party band rock stuff like Van Halen so perhaps Quiet Riot would have been the Van Halen had there not been a Van Halen.

[GCDEF]

 

This question pretty much comes down to which prominent guitar player of the early 80s era was the least influenced by EVH. The obvious answers seem to be Rhoads or Malmsteen. Rhoads would have been a slightly different guitar player without EVH (for better or worse? -- an interesting question), because you could hear a little bit of VH's influence in Rhoads' attack, flashy style and tremolo habits. Malmsteen, however, was influenced very little if at all by EVH. He existed almost entirely outside of EVH's orbit. I think if EVH had never come on the scene, we would have seen almost exactly the same Malmsteen we first saw ca. 1983. I'm less inclined to say George Lynch, because I think he was more influenced by EVH than Rhoads was. I could be wrong, but I think Lynch would have been a very different guitar player without EVH's presence.

 

 

As I tried to point out earlier, the answer's not that simple. Another time, another singer, different songs and nobody would have heard of him. His playing was only part of it. To understand it all you had to be there. Rock had taken a backseat to disco and punk in the mid to late 70s. A lot of the bands that were big back then were floundering from drug use and an identify crisis. Nobody really wanted to see Mick Jagger dressed like a girl and Steven Tyler could barely croak through a concert. Clapton was playing Lay Down Sally and Zeppelin, while still popular was pretty much done after Physical Graffiti.

 

Van Halen made it because they played balls out rock when the world was really screaming for it. DLR and the song choice game them commercial appeal that people like Frank Marino and some of the other guitar heroes lacked. Basically VH got the rock world back on track when it was floundering aimlessly and that's why people copied his style.

[Bitt81]

Guitar players needed the strength of a good band, someone to sing the songs (either themself or a solid front man type) and songs that will work commercially or else they are nothing more than niche artists who's influence is limited and are not known much outside of forums like this.

[_pete_]

As I tried to point out earlier, the answer's not that simple. Another time, another singer, different songs and nobody would have heard of him. His playing was only part of it. To understand it all you had to be there. Rock had taken a backseat to disco and punk in the mid to late 70s. A lot of the bands that were big back then were floundering from drug use and an identify crisis. Nobody really wanted to see Mick Jagger dressed like a girl and Steven Tyler could barely croak through a concert. Clapton was playing Lay Down Sally and Zeppelin, while still popular was pretty much done after Physical Graffiti. Van Halen made it because they played balls out rock when the world was really screaming for it. DLR and the song choice game them commercial appeal that people like Frank Marino and some of the other guitar heroes lacked. Basically VH got the rock world back on track when it was floundering aimlessly and that's why people copied his style.

 

 

I really have to agree with this.

I remember vividly the first time I heard VH. All the other groups were playing it pretty safe. VH came along and pretty much bitch slapped the music of the day. There was nothing close to it.

Love him or hate him, DLR was a huge reason for their success. Eddie brought the music but DLR conveyed the attitude that was sorely needed at the time.

[ashasha]

Van Halen as a whole was obviously stronger than the individuals, but I still think that if Eddie had hooked up with another strong vocalist that he was such a good composer that he would have still be a success. Perhaps not as big, but we'd know who he was.

The thing about that band that nobody seems to be mentioning is that they were doing something only mildly original in a very original manner. All that hard rock/heavy metal stuff from the '70's was either very intense and serious or very intimidating and scary.

Van Halen coined the phrase tooth metal because they smiled and had a fun time. They were one of the original party bands and had the chops to take on anyone. If they hadn't written those lyrics and had a different attitude they never would have been as big as they were. It's what got them to win over so many fans.

It's the attitude that makes Van Halen songs so great; it's just fun music.

And you won't convince me that if they were never successful that we would have had that batch of bands that took that style and ran with it. That band influenced everyone of those guys....sometimes that was a bad thing, but it was still the big force that shook up the scene.

Oh...and the answer to this thread is Allan Holdsworth.

Disagree....

I appreciate Holdsworth's talent, but I can't follow him and he never would have been a commercial success. I think that has a lot to do with the impact that EVH had.

[Fusion1]

 

think I have to go with satch , he made a pretty big splash even after VH

 

 

He was known well after VH and Yngwie. Probably had influence from both before he was on the scene. I would disagree that Satch would have become the Van Halen of the late 70s early 80s when we had no idea who Satch was until Mid to late 1980s, and even then he was a shredder without a real band, so only shredders really knew who he was and he didn't have mass appeal like a EVH did.

[mikesr1963]

 

 

I'm a little surprized at how people are saying this is a good cover of this tune. To be the player he wants people to believe he is he needs to do a lot better at playing this tune.

[TrickyBoy]

I'm a little surprized at how people are saying this is a good cover of this tune. To be the player he wants people to believe he is he needs to do a lot better at playing this tune.

 

 

First, I agree with this. I found his playing unwatchable.

 

As for EVH, IMO, what made him so great is two-fold:

 

1. He was THE game changing guitarist of my lifetime (I'm 38). He rewrote the "How to play rock guitar" manual. The tapping, the whammy bar, the tremelo picking, the use of harmonics and equally as importantly the complete balls-to-the-wall attitude that he played every note with. And his tone on those DLR records is unmatched!!!! There are very few guitarists that I can hear something from and immediately identify the guitarist. He's one of them.

 

2. He was able to (thanks in large part to DLR) package that amazing playing into something that the non guitarist could listen to and love. It wasn't music for wankers. It was bad-ass rock and roll with a bad-ass guitarist and a bad-ass front man.

 

Of all the guitarists that I've heard anyone mention, the only one that I feel has any real merit is Malmsteen. He was game changing in his own right, and today's generation of shredders owe a lot to him. But he was a HORRIBLE rhythm player (most of his songs were just chugging along with power chords and couldn't write a song to save his live. His music was for wankers. Ask the average 35 year old non-musician who Malmsteen is, and they'll have no clue.

 

Rhoads - great player, great songs, very little innovation

 

My two cents:blah:

[fabstrat]

rolling with your situation, it would undoubtedly be tom morello.

[fabstrat]

Eddie just took what Uli and Blackmore were doing, added in tapping, presumably from jazz cats and the fact that he was a classically trained pianist, and put it in a "fun rock" category. Timing is everything.

[TrickyBoy]

rolling with your situation, it would undoubtedly be tom morello.

Good one.

He's definitely amazingly innovative. I'm not sure how influential he is as everyone was tapping and doing whammy dives after VH1 and I'm not sure he has the same influence. However, that just might be the times. Nothing is as influential as it was 30 years ago. Way too many choices today.

[TrickyBoy]

Eddie just took what Uli and Blackmore were doing, added in tapping, presumably from jazz cats and the fact that he was a classically trained pianist, and put it in a "fun rock" category. Timing is everything.

 

 

You obviously don't like VH which I respect, but did a hell of a lot more than what you just described. The one thing I will agree is that timing is everything.

[fabstrat]

i love VH. I'm just a realist. I don't disregard his legacy at all, though.