Are VH recording a new cd for 2014 ?

[MEZRO]

I agree with most of this(pretty much all of it except the STW part haha). It will be interesting to see what they will do. Perhaps a more bluesy approach, similar to some of the WACF material. I think anything similar to WACF would be awesome!

Actually, I agree, if Van Halen produced a WACF type album at this point in their careers, it would be an amazing achievement and one on which, I am sure, would be critically acclaimed.

[Incomudro]

To put Dave's current vocal abilities into context, it's never been about how good a singer he was, or is.

It's about the character and tone of his voice, and the personality, bravado and inflection that you hear when you listen to him.

When I saw the original Classic Van Halen line up in 1984, I don't think anyone thought Dave was a great singer, but he was irreplaceable; Sammy and Gary went on to prove that point in later years.

As I watch and listen to Dave being drunk and singing on the '83 US Festival video, I realize that Dave couldn't give a damn about whether he is hitting the right notes, or singing the correct words. To focus on these issues is to miss the whole point about what Van Halen was about.

In this day and age of the internet and Youtube, it's easy to get distracted and place Dave's vocal performance under the microscope, but I have to say, I think anyone who is doing so, is forgetting the real reason they were attracted to Van Halen in the first place.

If anyone had criticized Dave's singing or performance in 1984 and wanted perfection, I would have advised them to go and listen to Pink Floyd instead.

Back in "the day" it didn't matter (at least not to many) if Dave was drunk or sang the song all over the place.
They were the mighty Van Halen.
Roth was king of the world, and between his showmanship, looks, attitude and studliness, he had it all covered.
Fast forward to now, and most of those things are gone, some by time but some by Roths choosing.
He could still be cool tough up their, but he's chosen to go all shtick, scarfs and jazzhands on us.
He couples that with trying to sing the songs in higher keys than they were originally sung in - in many cases.
If Dave were to bring some more rock and roll attitude to the stage, and drop the vocals into his lower range in many spots - it would do wonders.

I know I sound like I'm bashing, and it's not my intention.
I'm just being honest.
I saw the band last year at MSG and love the show- and Roth - as I've posted before.
But Roths' live perforomance is only for the faithful right now.

[unchainedguitars]

Back in "the day" it didn't matter (at least not to many) if Dave was drunk or sang the song all over the place.
They were the mighty Van Halen.
Roth was king of the world, and between his showmanship, looks, attitude and studliness, he had it all covered.
Fast forward to now, and most of those things are gone, some by time but some by Roths choosing.
He could still be cool tough up their, but he's chosen to go all shtick, scarfs and jazzhands on us.
He couples that with trying to sing the songs in higher keys than they were originally sung in - in many cases.
If Dave were to bring some more rock and roll attitude to the stage, and drop the vocals into his lower range in many spots - it would do wonders.

I know I sound like I'm bashing, and it's not my intention.
I'm just being honest.
I saw the band last year at MSG and love the show- and Roth - as I've posted before.
But Roths' live perforomance is only for the faithful right now.

I agree, completely.

There's this "show-tuney" aura & vibe to his vocals, onstage, these days.
The clothes, the extra wide grin, the jazz-hands...
This is not exactly the way i pictured Roth, at least in my mind.

I once said Roth needs to grow a beard & sing it low and manly (for lack of a better word).
I want that guy from "The Full Bug," right at the beginning & throughout the song.
That is the Dave i pictured in his later years, singing from the gut, kinda dark but still funny.
Ed could actually write some mean-assed riffs around that vocal sound.

But Dave went all broadway on us, in a way, attempting a range that eludes him.

And i stand by Dave's vocals from 78-84, album & live.
He was a great singer, his voice was effective and natural.
He could do a lot of cool things with it, just listen to "Take your whiskey home," or "Fools."
I'm not buying this crap that Dave was never a great singer, and what he's doing now is
not that different from what he did then.
Huge difference, vocally.

[Incomudro]

I agree, completely.

There's this "show-tuney" aura & vibe to his vocals, onstage, these days.
The clothes, the extra wide grin, the jazz-hands...
This is not exactly the way i pictured Roth, at least in my mind.

I once said Roth needs to grow a beard & sing it low and manly (for lack of a better word).
I want that guy from "The Full Bug," right at the beginning & throughout the song.
That is the Dave i pictured in his later years, singing from the gut, kinda dark but still funny.
Ed could actually write some mean-assed riffs around that vocal sound.

But Dave went all broadway on us, in a way, attempting a range that eludes him.

And i stand by Dave's vocals from 78-84, album & live.
He was a great singer, his voice was effective and natural.
He could do a lot of cool things with it, just listen to "Take your whiskey home," or "Fools."
I'm not buying this crap that Dave was never a great singer, and what he's doing now is
not that different from what he did then.
Huge difference, vocally.

Darker Dave.
Yes, I agree...
If Dave were to go with a darker, and more bluesy rock approach in image and singing vs. the giant grinning, polka dotted and vaudville shtict I think VH would benefit from it.
I know that Roth is all about making it fun, and I love that he's enjoying the hell out of himself up there.
I had a blast when I saw him myself.
He's earned it, he deserves it, and it's his rightful place.
But he plays it all for campiness now.

I agree with you UG, that Roth was an excellent singer.
No, he wasn't a Steve Perry sopranno, nor, a Halford, Dio Wagnerian force of nature.
But he was a bluesy, ballsy, street wise sounding rock and roller - and he had those Tibettan throat singing yelaps as well.
I've always love Roths studio vocals.

[unchainedguitars]

Darker Dave.
Yes, I agree...
If Dave were to go with a darker, and more bluesy rock approach in image and singing vs. the giant grinning, polka dotted and vaudville shtict I think VH would benefit from it.
I know that Roth is all about making it fun, and I love that he's enjoying the hell out of himself up there.
I had a blast when I saw him myself.
He's earned it, he deserves it, and it's his rightful place.
But he plays it all for campiness now.

I agree with you UG, that Roth was an excellent singer.
No, he wasn't a Steve Perry sopranno, nor, a Halford, Dio Wagnerian force of nature.
But he was a bluesy, ballsy, street wise sounding rock and roller - and he had those Tibettan throat singing yelaps as well.
I've always love Roths studio vocals.

The first time i heard "Cradle", on the radio in 1980, the voice just slayed me.
This wasn't Foreigner or Journey, this was some sort of delivery i'd never heard before.
He was doing all these jungle sounds (those initial 'ow!' 'ow!'), then he started the first verse
in this unique conversational style, like some badass punk kid.
He was singing about some delinquent, and at the time, i thought Dave was the bad influence
on the kid.

I remember, at the time, a lot of the older teens talking, saying, "Van Halen's singer is awesome!
Nobody else sings like that guy."

It was kinda true.
It was before all that mid 80's metal, it was a really unique sound.

"Hear about it later" was another one.
I thought, "The vocals sound so great over the music."
I never thought, "Great music, but the singer....not the best."
I always thought the vocals were excellent, which is another reason why i refused to accept Hagar.

[Incomudro]

The first time i heard "Cradle", on the radio in 1980, the voice just slayed me.
This wasn't Foreigner or Journey, this was some sort of delivery i'd never heard before.
He was doing all these jungle sounds (those initial 'ow!' 'ow!'), then he started the first verse
in this unique conversational style, like some badass punk kid.
He was singing about some delinquent, and at the time, i thought Dave was the bad influence
on the kid.

I remember, at the time, a lot of the older teens talking, saying, "Van Halen's singer is awesome!
Nobody else sings like that guy."

It was kinda true.
It was before all that mid 80's metal, it was a really unique sound.

"Hear about it later" was another one.
I thought, "The vocals sound so great over the music."
I never thought, "Great music, but the singer....not the best."
I always thought the vocals were excellent, which is another reason why i refused to accept Hagar.

I'm with you 100% on all of that.
I can sight great Roth vocal examples all over...
The delivery on Mean Streets is a prime one for me.
Aint Talkin' bout Love is another notable fave Roth moment for me - and an exemplifier of what Sammy could never convey.

[Nick AVH fan]

Dave's best vocal performance is on WACF, IMO. and the way he delivers, the album might as well be a Live album. The small mistakes and ad libs are the signature moves he pulls on stage.

[Jungle Drummer]

Dave's best vocal performance is on WACF, IMO. and the way he delivers, the album might as well be a Live album. The small mistakes and ad libs are the signature moves he pulls on stage.

I agree, and I agree with what UG and Inc are saying as well. There's a reason why Dave is my all time favorite rock singer. He does have a completely unique voice and delivery that is near impossible to replicate. Just listen to some of the VH tribute albums out there, and the so called "better" singers on there that cant do Dave justice. Sammy never came close on any of the Dave songs he attempted.

I still have to disagree with Mezro's contention that the Halens arent pulling their weight with the backing vocals. Yes, I think they should have utilized Ed/Wolf more on the actual record, instead of Dave double tracking himself so much. But, go find and listen, to a good recording of VH performing WIL on this tour. They(especially Wolf) were consistently excellent on the harmonies on that tune all tour long, among several classics. The problem is there are a lot of YT vids that dont do the sound of the band justice(basically all of them really) and Mezro has not actually had the chance to experience the band live in person. Is Wolf better than Mike vocally? No, Mike's the best ever in hard rock, but VH today still probably has the best live backing vocals of any hard rock band out there touring. I cant think of any band that's close right now. AIC maybe, although it's basically just Jerry and the Layne replacement co-singing lead on practically every song...

[unchainedguitars]

I had a few clear bootlegs from the last VH tour that i listened to, and the backing vocals were
actually very strong.
It sort of amplified my issues with Dave's vocals, because Wolf & Ed were nailing it.

Michael Anthony, of course, had such a unique voice.
But Wolf is actually a pretty strong singer, though he doesn't have MA's vocal presence.

[Jungle Drummer]

I had a few clear bootlegs from the last VH tour that i listened to, and the backing vocals were
actually very strong.
It sort of amplified my issues with Dave's vocals, because Wolf & Ed were nailing it.

Michael Anthony, of course, had such a unique voice.
But Wolf is actually a pretty strong singer, though he doesn't have MA's vocal presence.

With everybody talking about wanting VH to get back to the stripped down recording basics of WACF, I really hope they do the same with Dave and Wolf on the vocals, like they used to do with Dave and Mike. Wolf is very strong and really consistent.

I dont know, maybe the next record will be better than ADKOT...