MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
There's an element of that TJ, I've been noodling Focus, Oasis, Slade and Los Zigarros while replying to this thread (along with watching a French soap).
Love playing it, singing along is a bit harder. I don't much mind how old stuff is, my ears tell me if I like it.
Basically, if you listen to EVH and think it sounds like other players or generic or not especially standout, remember that he's the reason a load of other guitarists sound like that. Arguably with Mozart, the real stamp of genius is that he didn't inspire a million other people to become Mozarty composers... But then again, maybe he did and we just didn't hear it, it was really hard for a young punk composer to break out before social media
Matt Bellamy from Muse did a brilliant interview a few years back... He's a spectacular guitarist, technically speaking one of the best there's ever been, but that's mostly because his genius is that he's a sort of guitarist-hoovering robot, if it can be played he can learn to play it, and straight-up copy it so well that you'd think it was the original, or borrow from/take inspiration from it and mash it into a new thing.
So anyway, he was asked how he developed the "Muse guitar sound" and he said oh, there isn't one. I listened to my dad and decided I wanted to learn to play like that, so I did, then he said listen to Hendrix, and I decided I wanted to learn to play like that, so I did. And I did the same for Brian May and Rosetta Tharpe and Eddie Van Halen and George Lynch and obviously the Edge and Tom Morello and pretty much every other guitarist I loved, and I'm still doing it" The interviewer says, that's interesting, who was the hardest, and he goes without hesitation "Eddie Van Halen, god, that took ages" So there's a compliment.
Coincidentally, he also copied Mozart.
Similar to posts on this thread saying the same thing
Ooh get you
For me, a couple of things come to mind when considering someone like EVH.
Firstly, there's a massive difference between hearing his stuff now and hearing it when it happened. Check out for instance what sort of stuff was in "the Charts" in Feb 1978 and for the six months afterwards and then wonder to yourself "where the hell did the VH stuff even come from?".
Secondly, compare VH1 - which was done and dusted in a couple of weeks - to the stuff that came a few years afterwards and took so much longer to "engineer and polish". It's like comparing a guy who sets the "hour record" on a bike made from washing machine bits to a guy who does the same on a perfectly fitting ultra-light bike.
Lastly, recognise the difference between the guy who dreams & creates this sort of stuff and the multitude of people who can copy it quite ably, but are copying it none the less.
I remember all the VH albums coming out, so I remember where I was and what I was doing at the time. I guess that makes a difference too.
Note:
"Jump" was/still is ACE.
AC/DC owned Donnington on 18th Aug 1984! I was there too 🙂
I'll have to take your word with regards AC/DC owning Donnington in 84 as I was on my way home on the motorway whilst they were 'owning it'.
AC/DC were probably the biggest act around at the time so pretty much guaranteed a rollicking reception. Van Halen played to a pretty sceptical crowd and won them over.
Looking back over some of the posts I've got to agree with TJ, Van Halen had one great musician in the band. Sabbath and AC/DC had four each.
As for those casting aspersions on Jimi Hendrix, words fail me, because words can't quite describe how brilliant he was. There's technique and then there's 'feel'.I was going to post a link to his Woodstock performance of the star spangled banner but thought if you don't know it already why would you be posting on here in the first place? If were talking about music that's aged well then please someone provide me something that better sums up contemporary America?
As a band, van halen excelled at that California good-times vibe reminiscent of the beach boys at their zenith.
As a guitarist, it was Eddie's sheer enjoyment and exuberance in the mastery of his craft.
You can hear this on his guitar solo in 'hot for teacher'.
While your brain is thing itself up in knots in a vain attempt to keep pace with his playing, it's starkly apparent that he's having the time if his life.
Interesting opinions.
Whether you like the music or not, or whether you think guitar solos are musical onanism, you can't deny that he was a talented guy.
He didn't necessarily do anything new - tapping, swooping etc had all been done before but nobody did it like him. He played music like he wrote it - by adapting and combining existing stuff in ways no one had before. Using blues inspired pentatonics, blending them into classical major scale stuff, throwing in bits of mozart, Kreutzer and the like. He borrowed sounds from flamenco but used different techniques to do it, so it didn't sound quite the same, and no one else could imitate it. For me Cathedral from Diver Down iirc was typical of him. Playing his interpretation of classical arpeggios with his left while manipulating the volume control made a sound quite k unlike anything before it.
I suspect he's the kind of guy that is appreciated more the more you know about music in general, not just guitar.
He also re-arranged Beat it to make it the song it is. Rumour has it he turned away from the audience so no one could figure out his techniques, don't know how true that is.
It's a good thing he didn't continue with the drums after deciding his brother was better at them than him.
Not to mention the super strats so popular now wouldn't exist unless he built the first one from parts in the 70s.
Without reading the rest of this thread
To me Edward wasn't close to my favorite guitarist but he is without doubt the greatest guitarist of all time
I cannot describe the clear margin he has over everyone else even though I've played guitar most of my life. Musically its just perfect - groove etc etc
Is he a modern day mozart, to my ears I dont see why not.
One of the best musicians of the era certainly
Do I like van halen music with Roth or Hager - not that much
Edward had it all, without the beat it, eruption, spanish fly, catherdral bollocks everything else is enough to convince me without a shadow of a doubt that he was blessed with such enormous talent
Can we all ‘enjoy’ this again though pls
Oof. Keyboard's at the wrong pitch/key isn't it? And they're all fighting to play/sing to it?
Ooh get you
Oh, I thought it was quite funny 🙁
Looking back over some of the posts I’ve got to agree with TJ, Van Halen had one great musician in the band. Sabbath and AC/DC had four each.
My point was more about the "soul" or "integrity" ( can't find the right words really) in the music. Van Halen to me had none. technically great he might have been as a guitarist but music needs to stir the emotions and IMO VH did not.
music needs to stir the emotions and IMO VH did not
I'd disagree. Van Halen's music was good-time enjoy yourself music. Technically brilliant, true but essentially fun with no hidden messages, no deep meaning, just simple joyous exuberance. I suspect you are over thinking things...
@joshvegas You might not like his ability but you have respect Johhny Marrs skill in taking a Jaguar, telecaster or rickenbacker and not making it sound like a high tensioned lump of wood being smashed repeatedly against a total ****.
Now that's just uncalled for.
Say what you will about EVH, but I didn't think anyone was calling the good old Telecaster into question!
it’s a **** irritating shit show of a dad rock song like pretty much all of 80’s mainstream rock.
You've said similar a few times on this thread now. Not being funny, but if you actively dislike an entire genre of music then your opinion of an individual musician within that genre is about as relevant as my thoughts on Ryan Giggs as a footballer.
Matt Bellamy from Muse did a brilliant interview a few years back… He’s a spectacular guitarist, technically speaking one of the best there’s ever been
You're not wrong.
I've been fortunate to see any number of brilliant guitarists live over the years. I saw Whitesnake at Donington with some jobbing stand-in guitarist by the name of Steve Vai. I've seen Satch, Tom Morello, Herman Li... many, many more.
Then I got dragged against my better judgement to see Muse at the Lancashire Cricket Ground a few years ago. For me, Muse were always one of a myriad of "eh, I'll not turn the radio over if they come on" bands. And, honestly, they kinda still are. But live? Oh my god. I spent half the gig with my mouth open going "how? Just... how?!" Matt Bellamy is just something else, he's not natural. If a new Muse album came out tomorrow I'd be "meh" but if you offered me gig tickets I'd be working out which kidney I didn't need.
My point was more about the “soul” or “integrity” ( can’t find the right words really) in the music. Van Halen to me had none. technically great he might have been as a guitarist but music needs to stir the emotions and IMO VH did not.
Whereas I get a smile on my face when Van Halen come on, but AC/DC leave me cold. It's almost as if taste is subjective 🙂
@mogrim yup the comments about an artist who has clearly devoted most of his life to developing his art having "no soul" are just totally bizarre 🤣
Side note: anyone notice a correlation between the VH haterz and those forum members who take themselves just a little too seriously? 😉
AC/DC leave me cold.
Likewise. They've essentially been churning out the same song for 40 years, each to their own and all but I never really understood the love for them. The final nail in their coffin for me was their weapons-grade pretentiousness and vastly overinflated sense of self-importance when they played Download a few years ago.
Time for my favourite ever quote about music I think.
Years ago, on the Tube Jools Holland asked Sly and Robbie:
"What music do you guys listen too When you're not working?"
(Sly or Robbie) - "Everything"
(Jools again)
"But what music do you really rate?"
(Sly or Robbie again)
"Everything man..... Even in a bad tune you find something good"
"weapons-grade pretentiousness and vastly overinflated sense of self-importance"
I believe this to be a prerequisite for most white rock / blues based music. Pretty much all the afformentioned guitarists and bands fall prey to this conceit, from the Rolling Stones onwards. For many of our generation, Rock and Roll was put on a pedestal, at the summit of musical achievement, with the album being seen as the pinnacle of that achievement within musical hierarchy.
The thing is, Rock n' Roll was just a blip in musical history, It ceased to become a vital musical force sometime around the turn of the decade, It had a lifespan of just under 50 years. Funny to see how Rhythm and Blues came before Rock n' Roll as is stronger than ever. Hip Hop has been going for nearly 50 years and shows no sign of waning any time soon.
They’ve essentially been churning out the same song for 40 years
Very fond of some AC/DC stuff but essentially this.
Rock n’ Roll was just a blip in musical history,
Only if you have a very narrow definition of it.
rock and roll in the UK lasted about 5 years. Read up on the history. From about 57 to 63. skiffle before that then the beatles came along and merseybeat and the rest of the 60s sound
Tommy Steele, Billy Fury etc. that was rock and roll. Music to jive to
British rock and roll, or sometimes British rock 'n' roll, is a style of popular music based on American rock and roll, which emerged in the late 1950s and was popular until the arrival of beat music in 1962.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_rock_and_roll
They’ve essentially been churning out the same song for 40 years
That must give some comfort to the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, it means they've got at last ten more years worth of material.
“weapons-grade pretentiousness and vastly overinflated sense of self-importance”
I believe this to be a prerequisite for most white rock / blues based music.
Yup, Led Zeppelin are probably the best rock band ever IMO, and had it in spades.
Oof. Keyboard’s at the wrong pitch/key isn’t it? And they’re all fighting to play/sing to it?
There's lots of debate online about exactly what happened. There's an argument that if the keys were out of key the others would have easily been able to just shift up or down to accommodate. Some reckon EVH was handed the wrong guitar by a tech which was tuned differently for a different song, and he was making a point/being a dick by carrying on with it. Who knows!
TJ,
And I thought we were getting on so well with our Black Sabbath love in but you couldn't resist going all pedantic!
You mention skiffle but you're talking piffle. If someone calls themselves rock n' roll then they are rock n' roll, from AC/DC to Oasis, and I daresay any heavy metal band wouldn't be insulted if you called them rock n' roll either, (or do they have to check with you or Wikipedia first?)
Four or five blokes (usually) with guitar and drums = rock n' roll for most people.
Cougar,
You think I have a narrow definition of rock n' roll? You better check with TJ first before saying that!
Though I'd be interested to hear your broader definition of the term and some examples of where in the 21st Century rock n' roll has shown itself to be a vital musical force. The 21st Century has seen enormous cultural change in relation to globalism and rock n' roll has been very much on the sidelines in terms of global impact.
I saw Noel Gallagher say that the UK expected a rock n' roll based musical revolution every 5 years or so but that stopped sometime during the late nineties, he could only point to the Libertines and Arctic Monkeys as 21st Century examples and he acknowledged their influence was miniscule in relation to what had gone before.
You’ve said similar a few times on this thread now. Not being funny, but if you actively dislike an entire genre of music then your opinion of an individual musician within that genre is about as relevant as my thoughts on Ryan Giggs as a footballer.
You’re probably right. Bon Jovi, Van Halen, Europe, Skid Row, Rat, Motley Crew all bands that sound like a giant block of soulless dairy lee cheese to me and I was born in the late 70’s. Just not aged well imo. Unlike the rock music that came before and after. From Creedence and Sabbath to Soundgarden, Kyuss and Clutch. The stuff either side of it is great.
There were some great bands not in the mainstream in the 80’s. Would be a sad world if we all liked the same music though. I’m a less extreme (another terrible band) version of DezB, always trying to find something new or different in most genres. 80’s rock and (whispers it) ABBA and Disco are some of the rare things that leave me a bit meh. Yeah, technically good, but there needs to be more than that.
AC/DC are a bit like Status Quo or Travis. Just one song repeated. The difference with AC/DC is that it’s a damn catchy song!
Four or five blokes (usually) with guitar and drums = rock n’ roll for most people.
...
Though I’d be interested to hear your broader definition of the term and some examples of where in the 21st Century rock n’ roll has shown itself to be a vital musical force.
This is kinda what I was trying to say. No-one really says "rock 'n' roll" any more but rock music is very far from over. Elvis was a rocker, so is Brian Adams, so is James Hetfield, so is Necrobutcher.
But this is STW so we're ignoring the actual discussion and arguing over definitions and semantics. Whatever happened to Roll music?
Whatever happened to Roll music?
Hanson - Mmmmmm Bap.
Grum,
I grew up on all forms of rock music and love it all still. Doesn't mean that most practicioners (especially British ones) talk a lot of self inflated guff when interviewed, never missing an opportunity to dismiss what has come after them and elevating their own importance.
Being 'cool' in the UK has often been defined more by what you don't like than what you do like (and this has been true for most musical genres) I've never seen Quincy Jones, Nile Rodgers, James Brown or Stevie Wonder bitch on anyone else to make themselves look cooler or superior.
That's why that Sly and Robbie quote is worth a thousand interviews with any of the 'Rock Legends' were musing (pun intended) about here. It might also be why many other musical forms have out lasted rock music as well.
Though I’d be interested to hear your broader definition of the term and some examples of where in the 21st Century rock n’ roll has shown itself to be a vital musical force. The 21st Century has seen enormous cultural change in relation to globalism and rock n’ roll has been very much on the sidelines in terms of global impact.
I think the changes in how music is consumed have had a substantial impact on stadium sized rock. I’d say White Stripes, Black Keys, QOTSA, Biffy Clyro, Muse were all pretty substantial musical forces in the 2000’s. Hip-Hop has grown massively though and I’m struggling to think of any great rock bands from the last ten years. At least ones that have made it big. Plenty of smaller bands that are brilliant
There are three types of music:
1) Stuff that would make you turn the radio up
2) Stuff that would just be on the radio in the background
3) Stuff that would make you turn the radio off.
Now I reckon that my percentage split would be something like
1) 5%
2) 93%
3) 2%
It's interesting how the percentage split of 'music talked about on STW music threads' is about
1) 10%
2) 30%
3) 60%
People seem to have to make a point of telling other people about the music they don't really like or aren't really arsed about.
People seem to have to make a point of telling other people about
the musicanything they don’t really like or aren’t really arsed about.
FTFY.
Look at any thread where someone asks a question about Facebook or vegetarian food or Windows PCs or, well, anything. There will always be some quarterwit lining up to tell everyone how they're far superior because they deleted their account / couldn't give up bacon / use Linux even though it's a totally unrelated off-topic comment.
Cougar is right there. Just look at the recent what car for £40k thread, 40” TV or literally any thread on religion. This forum wouldn’t exist without people arguing about stuff, any stuff. As long as it is kept relatively civilised it’s all good.
Just laughing @cougar because I knew you’d mention this
couldn’t give up bacon
TJ,
And I thought we were getting on so well with our Black Sabbath love in but you couldn’t resist going all pedantic!
Its not pedatry to be correct. oasis are not rock and roll.
rock and roll is a specific genre
Its like saying Slade were heavy metal or Bob Marley sang soul. Its just wrong
🙂
😀use Linux even though it’s a totally unrelated off-topic comment.
Funkmasterp,
Pretty much as Noel Gallagher observed. There was some powerful rock music during the noughties, (White Stripes were pretty magnificent IMO) but the last decade?
The musical conversation at the moment seems to be about inter continental exchange, with so much of the music that grabs my ear these days I can't tell if it's been made in the UK, the Carribean, Latin America or Africa. This might be because digital platforms have created an underground channel where music and ideas can be exchanged before being disseminated and packaged by the industry. Rock music has traditionally relied on the music industry to package and promote its product and hasn't managed to find traction or develop it's creative potential in the new media age.
The biggest influence on music will always be technology. Pop tunes were 3 minutes long because that's what you could fit on a 7" single, the album became an archetype because 45 minutes was all you could fit on 2 sides of 12" vinyl, not because 45 minutes was the perfect length for a concept, the concept fitted the technological limitations, not the other way round. Likewise Dance music took off when someone realised that if you put just one tune on a 12" vinyl it became louder, heavier and better.
Where digital technology expands the possibilities for many musical practitioners enabling them to do things that were unthinkable only a decade earlier, it hasn't offered that much for rock music. It only seems to make rock music look more corporate and contrived, and in that respect it makes us realise the extent to which rock music has always been corporate and contrived.
Tj,
"Its not pedatry to be correct. oasis are not rock and roll"
You'll have to take that one up with Noel Gallagher.
However, if were looking to be correct, 'popular beat combo' would be the most falsifiable definition.
Never been a huge fan of Van Halen, but EVH was an amazing guitarist, and probably a major influence on a good chunk of the bands I listen to (who have in turn influenced a load of other bands I listen to).
Dimebag Darrell was one of my favourite guitarists, and was a huge EVH fan (he was even buried with one of Eddie's original guitars, the one he used on VHII).
And, honestly, they kinda still are. But live? Oh my god.
I saw Muse headline Glastonbury and had much the same reaction. In my case it, was "oh my God, will this please end soon". It really was dreadful toss.
"People seem to have to make a point of telling other people about the music they don’t really like or aren’t really arsed about."
The same people who comment on an RIP thread saying "I didn't like him/her, but RIP I suppose . . . ."
🙂
Its not pedatry to be correct. oasis are not rock and roll.
rock and roll is a specific genre
There's two different definitions of rock n roll, one specific and one general. It's really not that hard.
Agree with most of what you are saying, but there has always been and always will be great DIY rock music. Plenty of brilliant two piece bands out there like Henry’s Funeral Shoe and Left Lane Cruiser plus your one man bands like Car Seat Headrest. Lots of great rock from other countries too like Songhoy Blues and The Hu Rock covers such a huge swathe of music that it’s difficult to pigeonhole imo.
The great thing about the technology is that it’s opened up all musical styles and anyone from anywhere now has a platform for musical expression. No more major label A&R shenanigans, or at least less of them. The industry is no longer the driving force. How you describe rock pretty much applies to a lot of modern mainstream pop and rap.
Edit - Should have used quote @inkster
For anyone wondering why EVH is so well regarded, consider his contribution to the thriller album.
Thriller was not only the most successful album of all time, it was the most considered and resourced album of its time as well. It was a concentrated and deliberate effort by Quincy Jones and MJ to take on MTV and the prejudices of the music industry in general. Every detail of the record was picked over with a fine tooth comb.
EVH rocked up to the studio and dropped a couple of solos for free and then rearranged the tune so it worked better in relation to what QJ was trying to achieve with the album. All things considered I think EVH did the guitarists version of a mic drop.
Hanson – Mmmmmm Bap
This got lost in the discussion of why eigthwits would choose to exist without bacon, but it deserves more kudos.
Elegant interweaving of northern english and teenyboppers into a sum greater than the sum of it's parts. A true original on par with EVH himself.
Pretty much as Noel Gallagher observed. There was some powerful rock music during the noughties, (White Stripes were pretty magnificent IMO) but the last decade?
There's loads around now, but no big bands dominating. Lots of bands like Fontaines DC or Idles put out one or two decent albums but can't keep the momentum going.
There’s loads around now, but no big bands dominating.
Very true and personally I think that’s a good thing. So much choice and some great bands out there. I agree that most of them don’t seem to have much staying power. I thought Highly Suspect’s Mister Asylum was a good album and then it was massively downhill. I loved Idles first two albums, but just can’t get in to the latest one. Seems like they’ve run out of ideas.
This forum wouldn’t exist without people arguing about stuff, any stuff
Yes it would.
Very true and personally I think that’s a good thing.
Can't say I'm too concerned either, I'm sure the bands themselves would love to put out album after album of chart-topping success, but as a listener I couldn't care less. It might make finding new stuff marginally more difficult I suppose, but a combination of Spotify and the radio are good enough to get over that.
More seriously,
My point about arguing wasn't "people argue" but instead that some people will actively seek out discussions that they have no interest in in order to tell those who do how crap it all is. I don't understand it. It's like ringing into a radio phone-in poll to go "no comment."
To extend my earlier analogy: I don't read (most) sports threads unless I end up looking into a complaint. I could easily hang out in the football thread going "it's a big pile of shit" but, why on earth would I when I can read something I am interested in?
It’s different with music though. There is no clear best at any aspect of it. It’s all subjective. Best guitar player is different for everyone. There are loads that I love. Some of them are probably considered shit by others, but it doesn’t matter. I have a huge interest in music, but avoid football and car threads as I have zero interest.
Back to the OP - it’s harsh, but peers always gush and go massively overboard about musicians, movie stars etc when they die. The old joke about dying being the best way to sell records or movies is true. Nobody gives an honest opinion when somebody shuffles off the stage. Extreme example, but look at Michael Jackson, everyone was like “Eugh, possibly child molester, best distance myself from him” then he died and everyone was “Oooh amazing. Such a beautiful, delicate soul”
Here’s a couple of good videos about Eddie Van Halen from Warren Huart (producer)
It's like how people regularly talk about Tupac and Biggie being the greatest rappers of all time. You wot?
Exactly grum
Funkmasterp,
I get where you're coming from with regards the eulogies when people die. The Importent thing to remember with art is not to conflate what people are like with the art that they make. To do so is sentimental.
The best art is often made by complete and utter barstewards and psychopaths. Art is more than individual expression, it's language. It's un-redactable, If we find a piece of music is brilliant but subsequently change our minds because we find something about the artist reprehensible it doesn't change the quality of the music, it just means that we subject that art to our own moral codes. We use it to virtue signal.
Just remember folks, even in a bad tune (even by a bad person) you can find something good.