follow MP on Twitter


     Van Halen 2012 Tour

    Change Page: < 12 | Showing page 2 of 2, messages 40 to 44 of 44
    Author Message
    jammindude

    • Total Posts : 5135
    • Joined: 5/18/2002
    • Location: Maple Valley, WA USA
    • Status: offline
    Re:Van Halen 2012 Tour Friday, December 30, 2011 4:07 PM (permalink)
    Just saw this from VHND...
     
    JANUARY 3rd: 
    *CONCERT DATES & CITIES ANNOUNCED for first wave of tour
    JANUARY 10th: 
    *FIRST SINGLE PREMIERE
    *FIRST MUSIC VIDEO PREMIERE
    *CONCERT TICKETS GO ON SALE
    FEBRUARY 7th: 
    NEW ALBUM RELEASE DATE
    ALBUM TITLE: “The Future” is not the album title, as rumored. Stay tuned to VHND.com for an update on the actual album and song titles.
     
    " Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world
    Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled" - Neil Peart
    My Facebook page
    I am a Voice123.com voice actor!
     
    #40
      MusicMaker

      • Total Posts : 73
      • Joined: 3/23/2010
      • Location: Los Angeles
      • Status: offline
      Re:Van Halen 2012 Tour Friday, December 30, 2011 4:26 PM (permalink)
      Stadler

       Proglawyer very clearly asked why, if he was so talented, was he doing this gig - I think the words were "flying under his father's alcohol soaked wing".  Sounds like a knock to me.

      It sounds like a knock to me too, but not a knock on WVH.  I read that as a direct knock on EVH, but I guess you could kinda read it further.
       

      Where else is he going to play?  The band's name is "VAN HALEN", not "ANTHONY".  And there are now three "Van Halen's" in the band, out of four members.  Given the personnel turnover in some of the bands we love here - Yes, Purple, King Crimson - I cannot see how anyone can really criticize this.  Even Mike Anthony himself gets it, even if he doesn't like it.  

      He (Wolfie) can play wherever he wants.  He can even play with EVH and AVH.  But no matter what the lineup's names are, that's NOT the same thing as the band Van Halen.  Just like Liquid Tension Experiment isn't Dream Theater.  And Chickenfoot isn't Van Halen.  And so on.
       
      Regarding the lineup change, you really don't see how anyone can criticize this?  You really see nothing here that anyone else might take any objection too at all?  You think several thousand people are just angry about nothing?  Sure band lineups change.  Even Van Halen had already had 3 incarnations prior to Wolfgang's inclusion, two of them monstrously successful (and accepted).  That's not the problem.  In none of your examples was an original band member (the nicest and most consistent of the bunch, mind you), who had played on every album and every tour in the band's history, replaced involuntarily by a family member from a totally different generation (Wolfie wasn't even alive for all but 3 Van Halen albums).  Again- nothing against Wolfie here, but I have big time objections against what's gone down (no new material, and 3 more lineup changes) with the "band" VH over the past 13 years, which traces to EVH (and possibly AVH) directly.  Because frankly, there's no one else left to trace it to.
       

       ...I saw that show, and to be honest, once I started hearing DLR banging out those old tunes (he sounded great, by the way) it could have been George W. Bush playing bass and it would not have mattered to anyone other than Mike, Sammy and Mike's immediate family.  

      Fair enough about your own experience, but the rest of this statement isn't remotely true as it clearly mattered (and continues to matter) to a great many of us.  Take the opinions in this thread and extrapolate the ratio of discontent out amongst the rest of the fanbase.  Even if it was just a tenth of that many people, that's clearly still lots of upset fans out there.
       

      And I'm not trying to be argumentative... 

      Me neither (honest), and I readily concede that people can feel lots of different ways about this (that's why we're talking about it, right?).  But I keep "countering" because to me your posts seem to claim that no one could/should be feeling otherwise about it, or that there isn't any room for criticism of what is happening.  Clearly we do not all agree about that.
       
      #41
        Stadler

        • Total Posts : 2963
        • Joined: 8/6/2008
        • Status: online
        Re:Van Halen 2012 Tour Friday, December 30, 2011 9:01 PM (permalink)
        MusicMaker


        He (Wolfie) can play wherever he wants.  He can even play with EVH and AVH.  But no matter what the lineup's names are, that's NOT the same thing as the band Van Halen.  Just like Liquid Tension Experiment isn't Dream Theater.  And Chickenfoot isn't Van Halen.  And so on.

        Regarding the lineup change, you really don't see how anyone can criticize this?  You really see nothing here that anyone else might take any objection too at all?  You think several thousand people are just angry about nothing?  Sure band lineups change.  Even Van Halen had already had 3 incarnations prior to Wolfgang's inclusion, two of them monstrously successful (and accepted).  That's not the problem.  In none of your examples was an original band member (the nicest and most consistent of the bunch, mind you), who had played on every album and every tour in the band's history, replaced involuntarily by a family member from a totally different generation (Wolfie wasn't even alive for all but 3 Van Halen albums).  Again- nothing against Wolfie here, but I have big time objections against what's gone down (no new material, and 3 more lineup changes) with the "band" VH over the past 13 years, which traces to EVH (and possibly AVH) directly.  Because frankly, there's no one else left to trace it to.

         
        Maybe out of respect for you I should be more careful of my words; I do see why people could be critical of this.  But I don't understand it, if you get the distinction.   I guess I am more tolerant.  I vehemently object to Eddie Trunk's dismissal of the current Kiss on the same grounds (he feels a founding memeber - Ace, who's his buddy - was booted, and to make a buck Gene and Paul inserted a no-name into the makeup to "fool" the fans).  I admit to having mixed emotions on this: on one hand I believe that chemistry is important.  Even though Phil Rudd is not a marquee name, AC/DC with Phil is very different than AC/DC without him.  Portnoy is in this group, as is Deep Purple without Ian Gillan, and Yes without Steve Howe.  But on the other hand, Yes with Trevor Rabin is still a viable outfit, and should be called Yes, as should the current Kiss.  I like the four Steve Morse Deep Purple albums almost as much as the Blackmore albums (my favorite guitarist, by the way).  The Stones are the Stones without Brian Jones (who was forced out), so I don't see the Wolfie case as being so egregious.  It isn't fair to Mike, I grant you, but the difference isn't world altering.
         

         
        Fair enough about your own experience, but the rest of this statement isn't remotely true as it clearly mattered (and continues to matter) to a great many of us.  Take the opinions in this thread and extrapolate the ratio of discontent out amongst the rest of the fanbase.  Even if it was just a tenth of that many people, that's clearly still lots of upset fans out there.

         
        And I apologize; I was trying to be funny and it fell flat.  Of course people care.  And I would prefer Mike there in a perfect world. I just think if there was EVER a case where it was okay, this is the one.
         
        Look, I totally get your point; Mike is one of the most likable musicians in all of rock, and believe me, he SMOKED when I saw him on the Chickenfoot club tour before the first album.  I was blown away with how good he really is.   I just think there is another layer in there beyond "what the fans want". 
        It might just be more of Les's weirdo weedy jam band bullshit...
         
        #42
          Bails

          • Total Posts : 8142
          • Joined: 12/14/2007
          • Location: Near Philly, PA
          • Status: online
          Re:Van Halen 2012 Tour Friday, December 30, 2011 9:24 PM (permalink)
          Bruins


            The reason this type of talk drives me crazy is the greats that passed due to drugs or alcohol get a pass in many music fans minds. ... SRV, .... Are locked at a point in time...(usually at their peaks creatively) and are forever remembered at there peak. The only problem is they are dead and can never do something new.


           
          Just to be clear, SRV died in a tragic helicopter crash and was sober and cleaned up by that time.
           
          Re: Wolfie - I don't know the age differences, but I'm surprised that he never hooked up with Steve Lukather's son, who is a guitar player.  Luke and EVH are buds.
          It is during our darkest moments that we must focus to see the light.
          Aristotle Onassis
           
          #43
            MusicMaker

            • Total Posts : 73
            • Joined: 3/23/2010
            • Location: Los Angeles
            • Status: offline
            Re:Van Halen 2012 Tour Friday, December 30, 2011 11:36 PM (permalink)
            Excellent post, Stadler.  I understand more what you're saying.  I don't necessarily see it all the same way (some parts I do!), but I am definitely hearing where you're coming from and it certainly makes sense.  So no gripes here.  
             
            I still can't believe I'm even having this kind of discussion in the first place.  I *never* thought I'd be feeling unsupportive of Van Halen.  That would've been unthinkable for most of my life, and is still just plain bizarre now.
             
            Back to overall topic:
            Perhaps a whole new VH album on 2/7?  Wow- that would be a very big step for a band that hasn't made any at all in years.  I guess any signs of life should be welcome news, so I'll continue to struggle with mixed emotions about it.  Would be really cool if I heard about everyone else really loving it, and I could build up some anticipation/excitement for it.
             
             
             
             
             
            #44
              Online Bookmarks Sharing: Share/Bookmark
              Change Page: < 12 | Showing page 2 of 2, messages 40 to 44 of 44

              Jump to:

              Current active users

              There are 0 members and 1 guests.

              Icon Legend and Permission

              • New Messages
              • No New Messages
              • Hot Topic w/ New Messages
              • Hot Topic w/o New Messages
              • Locked w/ New Messages
              • Locked w/o New Messages
              • Read Message
              • Post New Thread
              • Reply to message
              • Post New Poll
              • Submit Vote
              • Post reward post
              • Delete my own posts
              • Delete my own threads
              • Rate post

              All Design and Content are Copyright mikeportnoy.com and NOT for use on other web sites.
              website credits
              2000-2012 ASPPlayground.NET Forum Version 3.8