Did the fall of Aerosmith lead to the meteoric rise of Van H

I'm reading the last Classic Rock magazine and they usually reprint old reviews/articles from other magazines. They have a 1989 article on Aerosmith from Q magazine.

In it, Joe Perry states "I think one of the reasons why Van Halen made such a clean sweep was because Aerosmith wasn't around anymore" (in reference to the early '80s).

I thought this was a really interesting comment. Thoughts?

Also, in the same article, it is mentioned that Steven contacted Joe to get back in the band once he heard Joe was about to join Alice Cooper's band. I've never heard about a Cooper/Perry team-up, but it would've made for a really interesting partnership!

I remember reading about Perry working with Cooper. I think he actually recorded some guest stuff with Alice. I can't remember which songs right now. I'll have to check my page and see if I mention it there.

ult

I knew of he and Steven working on Trash, didn't know of any earlier connection.

Don't know about that. I wasn't, you know, around at the height of it, but VH attracted a good amount of fans of the Riff that Aerosmith has never really hooked into. I see where the comparisons could be made, but it's different worlds. IMO.

I don't think so. It just got rid of some of the competition and made it easier for them.

Perry must be joking... EVH is ten times better than him and early VH was like Aerosmih on steroids.

Troublezone wrote:

EVH is ten times better than him

ouch

He may have a point. Aerosmith was pretty out to lunch starting around '78, which just happened to be when VH's debut was released and upped the ante for everyone concerned....

Troublezone wrote:

Perry must be joking... EVH is ten times better than him and early VH was like Aerosmih on steroids.

Better? I'd say different. Was Perry better than his heroes; Clapton, Page, Beck? Again, I'd say different. Van Halen was in the right place at the right time and they definitely filled a hole left by the struggling 70's band that were mostly burnt out on drugs falling apart at the time. Eddie inspired a new generation or metal guitarists.

ultmetal wrote:

Troublezone wrote:

Perry must be joking... EVH is ten times better than him and early VH was like Aerosmih on steroids.

Better? I'd say different. Was Perry better than his heroes; Clapton, Page, Beck? Again, I'd say different. Van Halen was in the right place at the right time and they definitely filled a whole left by the struggling 70's band that were mostly burnt out on drugs falling apart at the time. Eddie inspired a new generation or metal guitarists.

I guess you could say the same for Sabbath and Kiss... They were also aging bands running out of steam by the time VH hit the scene. I think VH would of still succeeded regardless of Aerosmiths status. I don't remember Ted Nugent having a hard time existing with Aerosmith...

Ult got it right, they were different and not necessarily comparable.

The first Van Halen album is one of the most energetic of that era, it was the flashy new sports car that glittered more than most others. That doesn't mean they were any better than other bands...they just had the requisite attitude and hunger to make others sound like they were standing still.

I would like to think that Joe Perry was joking but seeing a recent interview with him as he was rating all the Aerosmith albums--he gave them all very high grades. The rest of the 'rock world' did not ebb and flow with the happenings of Aerosmith.....
It just gave me impression he thinks very highly of his works. Don't get me wrong I was an Aerosmith freak in high school and traveled to see them in concert, etc. But if I have learned anything in life it's that you have to humble and honest. I did not get that feel from Joe-but what do I know.
Anyway, VH came out at the right time. Their production was stellar and Eddie played sooooooo cleanly compared to other guitar players. And I am not a VH fan, that is just how it came across to my ears.

ultmetal wrote:

Troublezone wrote:

Perry must be joking... EVH is ten times better than him and early VH was like Aerosmih on steroids.

Better? I'd say different. Was Perry better than his heroes; Clapton, Page, Beck? Again, I'd say different. Van Halen was in the right place at the right time and they definitely filled a hole left by the struggling 70's band that were mostly burnt out on drugs falling apart at the time. Eddie inspired a new generation or metal guitarists.

Correct - different style of playing. Does being able to shred make one a better guitar player? Or does playing with feel? Or does being super technical? Just different styles. I think EVH is awesome, but Perry is also an excellent player - just a different style.

I think Van Halen would have broken big even if Aerosmith where not busy snorting up off of Columbia.

Joe Perry and Alice Cooper did work together for a short spell in late 1983-84, at the time Alice Cooper and Bob Ezrin where going to work on "Welcome to My Nightmare Part II" but for whatever reason all parties involved lost interest.

I love Aerosmith but it seems they've always held themselves in too high regard. Less blow and more show would've helped.

Eddie's playing redefined the term of guitar hero. Prior to VH's debut, guys like Nugent and Perry were rock gods. But they were taking their cues from Hendrix, who redefined the term for his generation. Eddie's new tapping style made the older guys look/sound outdated. And Van Halen hit at just the right time. The older acts were growing stale an burnt-out. Van Halen helped bring in some of the flash & energy that was missing.

So while Joe may have some validity to his statement, I think Van Halen would have hit regardless of Aerosmith's decline. And it certainly didn't help Aerosmith's case that theye were out of their minds at the time.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Eddie's new tapping style made the older guys look/sound outdated.

The only problem, is that we ended up with 10 years of people trying to out-do what Van Halen, a plethora of soulless wankers trying to out-tap and out-harmonic minor themselves into instant stardom. Yawn.

detuned wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Eddie's new tapping style made the older guys look/sound outdated.

The only problem, is that we ended up with 10 years of people trying to out-do what Van Halen, a plethora of soulless wankers trying to out-tap and out-harmonic minor themselves into instant stardom. Yawn.

Every brilliant innovator has their sub-par imitators. Just look how many posters try (and fail) to be like me.

I don't think the fall of Aerosmith is like its being put here. Aerosmith to me were never really all that big to say VH took their spot. Let alone a band falling... falling from where and what? Aerosmith had their place, but VH were a totally different animal on the opposite side of the US pushing a total new energetic style of music and playing. I'll even go as far as to say yes EVH is better player than Joe Perry. Joe can write a song, but VH excelled and succeeded at that!

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Every brilliant innovator has their sub-par imitators. Just look how many posters try (and fail) to be like me.

It's your world, we're just living in it.

In short, no.

Van Halen would have been big anyway. Eddie's guitar prowess would have separated them from the pack even if Aerosmith were still a band back then.