WORST VAN HALEN ALBUM

I never heard VHIII (and don't ever intend to), so barring that choice I'll go with OU812 which is about as bad of an album from the 80s that I can think of.

Diver Down was a good record. Take away the covers and you have a decent EP. The original songs are phenomenal, much stronger than Fair Warning.

I just don't enjoy the Hagar years save for F.U.C.K. when they returned to form but with a twist. The trite love songs and overbearing keys made 5150 and OU812 unbearable for me, plus Eddie was prioritizing experimentation over good songwriting. It was just dull and lifeless apart from a few catchy choruses. And I just don't like Sammy Hagar.

Diver Down was the very last VH album that I finally upgraded from tape to cd just a few years ago when I found a cheap copy at a flea market. It's probably my least favorite of the DLR years, but it's got some charm.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

Diver Down was the very last VH album that I finally upgraded from tape to cd just a few years ago when I found a cheap copy at a flea market. It's probably my least favorite of the DLR years, but it's got some charm.

It actually had to grow on me, but outside of what other singles they were playing on the radio, Diver Down was my introduction to the band. My local rock station used to play full albums on Sunday nights and I would tape them. DD was one of them. I was kind of like, "really?? I thought these guys were a HARD ROCK band??" but later I heard the debut and magic happened. But eventually I came to love DD.

Count me as another who likes both DLR and Sammy era VH. III is the weakest album by far imo, they tried to hard to sound like something they weren't. I felt if Eddie wanted to try something that different do it as a solo artist, not VH.

thejokeriv wrote:

manny wrote:

I one of the few Van Halen fans that must have liked both the DLR and Hagar years, I prefer the DLR era by wiiiiiiiiiiiidddddddddddddeeeeeeeeeee margin, but other then 'OU812' which I thought was ok, I liked all of their studio albums with Hagar, IMO 'Balance' is especially good and underrated.

'Right Here, Right Now' is an OK live album, but I agree 'Live Without a Net' is a better representation of this band live.

I like both eras too. Agree on Right Here Right Now - according to Sammy's biography it's not really a live album as almost every track was re-recorded

That is probably why it sounds so uninspired. It's a good album, it just doesn't have the feel. They should have held off on this one.

I actually like III, it has some great songs on it, notably Fire in the Hole. I don't remember the rest of the album as I have not heard it in years, so that may say something right there. I don't remember ever hating it, more like "meh... another alternative wanna-be". Not bad, not great. I can't say that I hate any VH album specifically, but the 2 (then) new songs off of the Greatest Hits Vol. I were unlistenable.

I will say that VH has never been a favorite band of mine but I like them. I have not been able to listen through an entire VanHagar album tho, they just seem to go on and on and on... ad infinitum, except for Balance. Balance is a brilliant album.

Shawn Of Fire wrote:

Everybody wants to shit on 'III' when, in fact, it's a strong musical record. It never had a chance since A- the whole world saw DLR come out w/ VH on MTV and made everyone want that and B- much of it didn't sound like then-recent VH. It's a deep record musically and lyrically, filled w/ some of Eddie's and Alex's best playing ever. A couple of the songs were a little weird ("Once" and "How Many Say I") but IMO that speaks to the diversity within Eddie's musical arsenal. Should Eddie have attempted to sing? Probably not. Were a couple of the songs a little long? Yeah. But 'III' is far from a throw away record.

Agreed. I didn't find "III" to be as bad as people say it is. I actually find this album BETTER than a lot of the Van Hagar drivel.

I like most Van Halen, but for me, those first four albums are untouchable. Nothing they did can even compare. There was a chemistry and a vibe that somehow got lost with "1984". The desire to go into a more pop direction is probably the cause of that being lost IMO.

Diver Down is basically the Great Rock and Roll Swindle. It's barely an EP. 1/3 of this album is actual Van Halen songs, 1/3 are covers, and the other 1/3 is silly fluff consisting of jokes and guitar instrumentals. More of an EP than an album.

ultmetal wrote:

Diver Down is basically the Great Rock and Roll Swindle. It's barely an EP. 1/3 of this album is actual Van Halen songs, 1/3 are covers, and the other 1/3 is silly fluff consisting of jokes and guitar instrumentals. More of an EP than an album.

Do you know what i really don't understand about that record? Since it was obviously just a quick contractual obligation album why didn't they record some of those leftover tracks like She's A Woman, Big River, Outta Space, etc. that later ended up on A Different Kind Of Truth? It also would have been cheaper than licensing those cover tunes.

Still, I'll take the good material off Diver Down over any of the Hagar era any day of the week.

Quote :

why didn't they record some of those leftover tracks like She's A Woman, Big River, Outta Space, etc. that later ended up on A Different Kind Of Truth? It also would have been cheaper than licensing those cover tunes.

Maybe they just didn't think those tunes were very good and didn't want to bother with them at the time? Or, maybe, if it was thrown together as an obligation, then why use good left-overs? Give them some half baked tunes and make the record company pay for some covers. VH were at the top of their game, so money shouldn't have been an issue with either them or the Warner Brothers.

"Eddie wants a gold-plated guitar? Sure thing. They want to record Pretty Woman? No problem. Dave had 3 underage groupies die in his dressing room? Call The Wolf. He'll take care of it. Charge it back to the band under 'Green M & M Removal Service'."

S.D. wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

Diver Down is basically the Great Rock and Roll Swindle. It's barely an EP. 1/3 of this album is actual Van Halen songs, 1/3 are covers, and the other 1/3 is silly fluff consisting of jokes and guitar instrumentals. More of an EP than an album.

Do you know what i really don't understand about that record?  Since it was obviously just a quick contractual obligation album why didn't they record some of those leftover tracks like She's A Woman, Big River, Outta Space, etc. that later ended up on A Different Kind Of Truth?  It also would have been cheaper than licensing those cover tunes.  

Still, I'll take the good material off Diver Down over any of the Hagar era any day of the week.

Great point. Hell, they even used House of Pain (in a terrible fashion) on 1984. It could have easily gone on Diver Down.

Going even further, why the living F*ck did they even eliminate She's the Woman and Big River (originally Big Trouble, I believe) from any of their recordings?? Those songs are KILLER.

corplhicks wrote:

Going even further, why the living F*ck did they even eliminate She's the Woman and Big River (originally Big Trouble, I believe) from any of their recordings?? Those songs are KILLER.

Maybe the band or record company just didn't think those tunes were up to snuff back in the 70's. Remember they were writing in the LP format, so only the absolute best made it to record. Look at those first 4 VH albums and they are just lean and mean. No filler. 35-40 minutes, 8 or 9 tracks. Get in and get out.

It's easy to go back now and say "Hey, these aren't so bad. A little spit & polish and there's some good tunes here". Bands nowadays throw everything on the album, then the fans say it's too long or packed with filler.

MetalGuy71 wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

Going even further, why the living F*ck did they even eliminate She's the Woman and Big River (originally Big Trouble, I believe) from any of their recordings?? Those songs are KILLER.

Maybe the band or record company just didn't think those tunes were up to snuff back in the 70's. Remember they were writing in the LP format, so only the absolute best made it to record. Look at those first 4 VH albums and they are just lean and mean. No filler. 35-40 minutes, 8 or 9 tracks. Get in and get out.

It's easy to go back now and say "Hey, these aren't so bad. A little spit & polish and there's some good tunes here". Bands nowadays throw everything on the album, then the fans say it's too long or packed with filler.

True. I actually thought the major drawback on Different Kind of Truth, other than the terrible title and artwork, was the length and quantity of songs. They should've cut that nearly in half (I otherwise loved the album btw).

corplhicks wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

Going even further, why the living F*ck did they even eliminate She's the Woman and Big River (originally Big Trouble, I believe) from any of their recordings?? Those songs are KILLER.

Maybe the band or record company just didn't think those tunes were up to snuff back in the 70's. Remember they were writing in the LP format, so only the absolute best made it to record. Look at those first 4 VH albums and they are just lean and mean. No filler. 35-40 minutes, 8 or 9 tracks. Get in and get out.

It's easy to go back now and say "Hey, these aren't so bad. A little spit & polish and there's some good tunes here". Bands nowadays throw everything on the album, then the fans say it's too long or packed with filler.

True. I actually thought the major drawback on Different Kind of Truth, other than the terrible title and artwork, was the length and quantity of songs. They should've cut that nearly in half (I otherwise loved the album btw).

I loved the album too but if 'Different Kind of Truth' had been a little shorter, I think the impact might have been bigger as far as a listener, but frankly I did not care I had waited DLR to get with the Van Halen boys since 1984!!

manny wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

MetalGuy71 wrote:

corplhicks wrote:

Going even further, why the living F*ck did they even eliminate She's the Woman and Big River (originally Big Trouble, I believe) from any of their recordings?? Those songs are KILLER.

Maybe the band or record company just didn't think those tunes were up to snuff back in the 70's. Remember they were writing in the LP format, so only the absolute best made it to record. Look at those first 4 VH albums and they are just lean and mean. No filler. 35-40 minutes, 8 or 9 tracks. Get in and get out.

It's easy to go back now and say "Hey, these aren't so bad. A little spit & polish and there's some good tunes here". Bands nowadays throw everything on the album, then the fans say it's too long or packed with filler.

True. I actually thought the major drawback on Different Kind of Truth, other than the terrible title and artwork, was the length and quantity of songs. They should've cut that nearly in half (I otherwise loved the album btw).

I loved the album too but if 'Different Kind of Truth' had been a little shorter, I think the impact might have been bigger as far as a listener, but frankly I did not care I had waited DLR to get with the Van Halen boys since 1984!!

Yup. There are even tracks on that album that should have been thrown out, but it didn't matter either way, I was satisfied.

My favorite VH album for more than a decade now has been 5150. I realize this is not really a popular choice around these parts. I wouldn't say that it is their "best" album (that honor probably should go to the debut, maybe WACF). However, it is my favorite. It's always meant a lot to me since I first heard it in high school when VH was my favorite band, bar none. So, for sentimental reasons, it's still often the album I turn to first when I want to hear some VH.

I need to listen to some early Van Halen because I have only ever heard two of their records 1984 & 5150. I didn't like either but 5150 was much less my kind of thing so I'll have to go with that.

S.D. wrote:

ultmetal wrote:

Diver Down is basically the Great Rock and Roll Swindle. It's barely an EP. 1/3 of this album is actual Van Halen songs, 1/3 are covers, and the other 1/3 is silly fluff consisting of jokes and guitar instrumentals. More of an EP than an album.

Do you know what i really don't understand about that record?  Since it was obviously just a quick contractual obligation album why didn't they record some of those leftover tracks like She's A Woman, Big River, Outta Space, etc. that later ended up on A Different Kind Of Truth?  It also would have been cheaper than licensing those cover tunes.  

Still, I'll take the good material off Diver Down over any of the Hagar era any day of the week.

Ted Templeton and the record company wanted covers. Dave was on board and furthered the cause. Eddie didn't like it and was basically told what to do. He suggested Pretty Woman after trying out others. The end result was Ted and Dave got their way. Most folks didn't get it, and share Eddies opinion on the album. The other songs were never even discussed, due to the iron rule of Ted and company. 1984 was the first album to have Eddie's opinions matter. The rate at which they were burning with 5 albums in 5 years with touring in between, it's not too hard to understand why the band couldn't grab their footing and make decisions for themselves. All in all, Diver Down was brilliant. What other high rolling band would have dared to do that. Not only did they pull it off, but they also kept the record company happy. Not many bands could have done it and survived the aftermath.

Boris2008 wrote:

I need to listen to some early Van Halen because I have only ever heard two of their records 1984 & 5150. I didn't like either but 5150 was much less my kind of thing so I'll have to go with that.

You must try:

Van Halen
Van Halen II
Women and Children First

Objectively speaking, those are probably their three best albums. Don't listen to all the praise Fair Warning gets. Its second half is probably the weakest of all David Lee Roth era albums.

^^ I disagree with the above opinion of Fair Warning, I think it's a really good album.  Plus side two kicks off with Unchained which is one of their best songs.  I also really like So This Is Love, great solo in that tune. The last couple tracks are definitely filler, but the strength of the rest of the album makes it worthwhile.

S.D. wrote:

^^ I disagree with the above opinion of Fair Warning, I think it's a really good album.  Plus side two kicks off with Unchained which is one of their best songs.  I also really like So This Is Love, great solo in that tune.  

I do love "Unchained." Basically, I like the first 5 tunes. After that they lose me.

I think Van Halen had a similar issue as many bands back when record labels were demanding a new record every year. They had plenty of material written prior to getting signed and that carried them through the first 2 albums. Then they had to start writing and when your life consists solely of touring and recording (and massive partying) it can be hard to come up with a full albums worth of strong material, so the filler started to creep in. Women And Children First, Fair Warning, Diver Down and 1984 all suffer from this in varying degrees.

S.D. wrote:

I think Van Halen had a similar issue as many bands back when record labels were demanding a new record every year.  They had plenty of material written prior to getting signed and that carried them through the first 2 albums.  Then they had to start writing and when your life consists solely of touring and recording (and massive partying) it can be hard to come up with a full albums worth of strong material, so the filler started to creep in.  Women And Children First, Fair Warning, Diver Down and 1984 all suffer from this in varying degrees.  

That's a great point, which is why their debut is their most consistent.

Diver Down isn't bad at all IMO. Little Guitars, Where Have All the Good Times Gone? and the instrumental "Cathedral" are great melodic hard rock gems.