(Roth-era) Van Halen or Guns N' Roses?

[El Barto]

It'd be interesting to know some ages in relation to the votes. At some point there's a birth year where the votes flip, I think. I'm pretty sure nobody born before '75 is in the GnR camp. I doubt there are many people born in the 80's on the VH side of things, though there are some.

I'm also curious if people in the 80's really know just how game-changing VH was. Damn near everything EVH did was new and fresh, and he combined it all so effortlessly into amazing riffs. He wasn't just coming up with clever riffs, he was playing riffs that nobody could have even envisioned. Combined with that tone of his he really changed things for everybody.

[IDontNotDoThings]

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

[KevShmev]

Given how uneven those albums are considered to be by most, combined with the fact that they were already releasing an album of all covers only 5 studio albums (4 really, since Lies was an EP) into their career, tells me that they shot their load early and simply did not have enough ideas and songs to have any kind of longevity.

Respectfully, that isn't true at all. Don't forget, Lies was an EP released right after Appetite, and it is half covers. It wasn't for lack of ideas, it was because the band simply exploded. Slash's book gives a ton of insight into just how chaotic and insane the UYI tour was (and how wild the band had partied from even before Appetite's recording). Then you have all the drugs and fighting and bickering. It wasn't for lack of ideas, but rather strong personalities in the band clashing and Axl himself wanting full control of the band and its name (forcing everyone to sign a contract signing it over to him - there's also a bizarre story about Slash walking into the studio one day and seeing racks of synthesizers just lining the studio walls). Slash himself left the band after he both learned that Duff was out (this was 96 I believe) and that Axl had Paul Tobias rerecord Slash's own guitar parts without informing Slash.

They had tons of ideas but due to Axl's desire to control the band, perfectionism (see how long it took Chinese Democracy to come out and how nothing else has been released since), and telling this lightning-in-a-bottle lineup to effectively take a hike, the band fell apart. Shame.

Despite all of the drama created by the asshole that is Axl Rose, the fact remains that nearly 40% of their output on their first five albums (all of TSI, half of Lies and the covers on the Illusion records) were covers, which tells me that they were lacking in original material.

It'd be interesting to know some ages in relation to the votes. At some point there's a birth year where the votes flip, I think. I'm pretty sure nobody born before '75 is in the GnR camp. I doubt there are many people born in the 80's on the VH side of things, though there are some.

I'm also curious if people in the 80's really know just how game-changing VH was. Damn near everything EVH did was new and fresh, and he combined it all so effortlessly into amazing riffs. He wasn't just coming up with clever riffs, he was playing riffs that nobody could have even envisioned. Combined with that tone of his he really changed things for everybody.

Amen to that.  You hate to play the "you had to be there" card, but it really applies when it comes to EVH's playing.  Shoot, I didn't hear Van Halen until the video for Jump came out, and even though the solo is really the only guitar in the song (aside from the riffing he does at the end), that knocked me out. And then Panama was the next video and that destroyed me.

[max_security]

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

Which guitar album are you comparing it to that was recorded before 1978 ?

[The Walrus]

Despite all of the drama created by the asshole that is Axl Rose, the fact remains that nearly 40% of their output on their first five albums (all of TSI, half of Lies and the covers on the Illusion records) were covers, which tells me that they were lacking in original material.

I still don't think that's fair. There's nearly three full albums of material across the UYI albums - each one is just under 76 minutes each, with 30 tracks in total, each one more than most bands put into a single disc, sometimes twofold. Yeah, there's a cover on each one, but let's not dismiss the wide range of styles and sounds on just the UYI albums. There's more covered on each of those than a lot of rock bands explore in their whole careers. GnR just enjoy doing covers, even in concerts where they play 35+ songs they'll throw in a few covers. And I think whether or not one likes Chinese Democracy, you can't deny the wide range of styles there, too. Quality over quantity. (and imo, CD is a fantastic album)

[IDontNotDoThings]

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

Which guitar album are you comparing it to that was recorded before 1978 ?

I don't doubt what it did for reinventing guitar playing, but as an album from a musical standpoint, I don't see the appeal. Most of the songs (Eruption aside) just feel like above-average songs of the era with some amazing guitarwork thrown in. Surely it revolutionised a lot for guitarists & rock in general, but when I hear something like "one of the greatest rock albums of all time", I dunno, I guess I expect a bit more focus on actual songwriting. & songs like Janie's Cryin' or Atomic Punk I find actively bad, even beyond the point where EVH's guitar-playing can save them.

Idk, I wish I got it, but I don't 

[max_security]

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

Which guitar album are you comparing it to that was recorded before 1978 ?

I don't doubt what it did for reinventing guitar playing, but as an album from a musical standpoint, I don't see the appeal. Most of the songs (Eruption aside) just feel like above-average songs of the era with some amazing guitarwork thrown in. Surely it revolutionised a lot for guitarists & rock in general, but when I hear something like "one of the greatest rock albums of all time", I dunno, I guess I expect a bit more focus on actual songwriting. & songs like Janie's Cryin' or Atomic Punk I find actively bad, even beyond the point where EVH's guitar-playing can save them.

Idk, I wish I got it, but I don't 

Atomic Punk , I always liked that tune. Anyway Van Halen seemed to have all of the pieces needed for the time. The disco thing was comming to a close , the economy was in the tank due to the gas crises , the Cold War loomed , and so on. VH1 had like a party type energy that was just right  , and they were clever enough to keep an old school vibe ( You Really Got Me , Ice Cream Man ) . They didn't actually do anything that hadn't been done before but they brought it all into 1 package with attitude , musicianship , and soul . To get a better perspective one might have to jump in something like a late 1960's big block Plymouth , turn up a bottle of Jack Black , pop Runnin With The Devil into the 8 track and push the gas pedal to the floor. Or something like that there.

[WildRanger]

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

What all the hype is about? Maybe because that debut has CHANGED hard rock music. I don't consider it to be one of the greatest albums of all time, but I think it's definitely one of the greatest HARD ROCK albums and one of the greatest DEBUT ALBUMS.

[KevShmev]

Despite all of the drama created by the asshole that is Axl Rose, the fact remains that nearly 40% of their output on their first five albums (all of TSI, half of Lies and the covers on the Illusion records) were covers, which tells me that they were lacking in original material.

I still don't think that's fair. There's nearly three full albums of material across the UYI albums - each one is just under 76 minutes each, with 30 tracks in total, each one more than most bands put into a single disc, sometimes twofold. Yeah, there's a cover on each one, but let's not dismiss the wide range of styles and sounds on just the UYI albums. There's more covered on each of those than a lot of rock bands explore in their whole careers. GnR just enjoy doing covers, even in concerts where they play 35+ songs they'll throw in a few covers. And I think whether or not one likes Chinese Democracy, you can't deny the wide range of styles there, too. Quality over quantity. (and imo, CD is a fantastic album)

Well, quality is subjective, and between Appetite, Lies and the Illusion albums, there are about 11-12 songs that I like enough to ever go out of my way to listen to, so I believe they have a lack of quality and quantity.  Even nearly half of Appetite is stuff I can do without. 

I never heard Chinese Democracy (and still have no interest in hearing it).

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

What all the hype is about? Maybe because that debut has CHANGED hard rock music. I don't consider it to be one of the greatest albums of all time, but I think it's definitely one of the greatest HARD ROCK albums and one of the greatest DEBUT ALBUMS.

Well said. The debut, you could argue, is the single most influential rock guitar album ever (Are You Experienced is the other that could have a really strong argument).

[King Postwhore]

Being there at the time of the release of VH and the hype across America is something you could only experience.  I think their demise and lack of music in the last decade plus hurt their legacy

[KevShmev]

I am not sure that is true.  With music, bad or no music later in your career rarely hurts a legacy.

G N' R hasn't done squat for a long time, yet people still love them.

Yes has done some major crap in the last few years and their legacy as a prog giant of the 70's is firmly intact.

Billy Joel hasn't done any new rock/pop music since the early 90's, yet he is just fine.

etc.

I think, if anything, EVH's asshole-ish behavior has hurt more than anything.  Between his despicable treatment of Michael Anthony, the R&RHOF farce (two ex-members were the only ones to show up) and his disdain for apparently anyone whose last name isn't Van Halen, EVH has done a wonderful job of trampling his own legacy.

[The Walrus]

Kev, Chinese Democracy is a fantastic album if you can get past the vocals. Personally I enjoy them

[IDontNotDoThings]

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

What all the hype is about? Maybe because that debut has CHANGED hard rock music. I don't consider it to be one of the greatest albums of all time, but I think it's definitely one of the greatest HARD ROCK albums and one of the greatest DEBUT ALBUMS.

oH sHiT iTs ChAoSsYsTeM

Kidding, but in all seriousness (like I said earlier), I don't doubt what it did for music as a whole, I just find the songs themselves (without the historical context) to be above-average at best, & actually pretty bad at worst. I'll keep listening through the discography, but it just hasn't floored me so far (at least not yet).

Kev, Chinese Democracy is a fantastic album if you can get past the vocals. Personally I enjoy them

Also this

[Cool Chris]

I never liked GnR much, but will admit I listened to Sweet Child of Mine whenever it came on the radio or MTV. I liked Patience, and Civil War, mainly for the Cool Hand Luke soundbyte.

My range of opinion on Roth Halen material is about as wide as it is for any band. The stuff I love, I totally love; the stuff I dislike, I really dislike.

[soupytwist]

Interesting thread for my point of view.  I'm from the UK and from my prospective Van Halen have never been a big deal, and dare I say it a bit of a joke of a band.  So seeing Van Halen dominating G'n'R in this thread is odd for me.

I've done some investigating and yeah Van Halen just didn't make much of a splash in the UK at all.  Only 2 albums have reached Gold (100,000 sales) in the UK (Debut & 1984) and Van Halen II reached Silver (60,000 sales) the rest are unclassified.    On the flip side 'Appetite' is 3 times Platinum and both Illusion albums went Platinum.  Also the songs of Appetite are radio staples in the UK - the only song you hear from VH is the frankly dopey 'Jump'.

So yeah, it's been interesting.  I'm tempted now to go and listen to some VH.

[Dave_Manchester]

Interesting thread for my point of view.  I'm from the UK and from my prospective Van Halen have never been a big deal, and dare I say it a bit of a joke of a band.  So seeing Van Halen dominating G'n'R in this thread is odd for me.

I've done some investigating and yeah Van Halen just didn't make much of a splash in the UK at all.  Only 2 albums have reached Gold (100,000 sales) in the UK (Debut & 1984) and Van Halen II reached Silver (60,000 sales) the rest are unclassified.    On the flip side 'Appetite' is 3 times Platinum and both Illusion albums went Platinum.  Also the songs of Appetite are radio staples in the UK - the only song you hear from VH is the frankly dopey 'Jump'.

So yeah, it's been interesting.  I'm tempted now to go and listen to some VH.

I'm from Britain too, born in 1981, and I have the same thoughts as you. Guns n Roses were an immense band when I was growing up, they were absolutely everywhere, songs like Don't Cry and November Rain and Paradise City were played constantly. Whereas to be completely honest the only time I was ever exposed to Van Halen as a kid was that snippet in Back To The Future. Then later I heard Jump and was amused by the video more than anything. I can appreciate that something like Eruption was pioneering and original for its time, but as I said in an earlier post, I think if you weren't there for it then it doesn't have that much of an impact. By the time I heard Eruption for the first time I'd already heard the (in my opinion much better) later stuff it inspired like For The Love of God and the Fire Garden Suite, and Eric Johnson's work, and Paul Gilbert's stuff, and Petrucci's solos, and so on.

Yesterday I listened to a bunch of their early albums (they're all short, clocking in at around half an hour each). And...yeah, it's really well played and fun, but nothing really hit me like Guns did/do. I listened to their first 5 albums and I didn't hear anything which had the creativity of a song like Estranged or Civil War. And I far prefer Slash as a guitarist, both in tone and note choices, to EVH.

[WildRanger]

Yesterday I listened to a bunch of their early albums (they're all short, clocking in at around half an hour each). And...yeah, it's really well played and fun, but nothing really hit me like Guns did/do. I listened to their first 5 albums and I didn't hear anything which had the creativity of a song like Estranged or Civil War. And I far prefer Slash as a guitarist, both in tone and note choices, to EVH.

When it comes to albums I would put Appetite over any Van Halen album, but VH debut and Fair Warning are only two VH albums that I consider great, VH II and WACF are very good, 1984 is average and pretty commercial and Diver Down is weak.
I always found Illusions albums really underrated by a lot of rock fans, who claim that GnR have only one strong album - AFD.
And I agree that Van Halen in their catalog don't have such musically creative and deep songs as Estranged and Civil War.

[Stadler]

I've listened to VHI about 5 times now & I just can't for the life of me see what all the hype is about.

Which guitar album are you comparing it to that was recorded before 1978 ?

I don't doubt what it did for reinventing guitar playing, but as an album from a musical standpoint, I don't see the appeal. Most of the songs (Eruption aside) just feel like above-average songs of the era with some amazing guitarwork thrown in. Surely it revolutionised a lot for guitarists & rock in general, but when I hear something like "one of the greatest rock albums of all time", I dunno, I guess I expect a bit more focus on actual songwriting. & songs like Janie's Cryin' or Atomic Punk I find actively bad, even beyond the point where EVH's guitar-playing can save them.

Idk, I wish I got it, but I don't 

But that's the thing; what era?   Pick a song at random from the first album, and name another song from 1977 that sounds like that.  You can't.    One of the biggest records of the year (rock that is) from '77 was Love Gun by Kiss. Another was the Sex Pistols.  Nugent was big then too.   Block power chords and a short, blues-based solo, with some lyrics about sex.  Almost formula.   Then you get VH, some lyrics about sex, but almost the sound of ACTUAL sex behind it (I'm speaking in metaphors).  There were a lot of Chevy's in rock in '77, but VH was a  Yea, there was as shit ton of tapped solos in '83, '84, '85, but that was FIVE YEARS after Van Halen.   

[El Barto]

Aint Talkin Bout Love pretty much says it all. People get all gooey over Eruption and Ed's soloing, but it was his rhythm playing that really defined VH. You listen to an instrumental version of ATBL or an isolated guitar track and then consider that he played this in 1977, when hard rock was Sin After Sin, Let there be Rock, and Cat Scratch Fever. It's almost an entirely new kind of music.

ATBL Instrumental

[Big Hath]

 love appetite for destruction, but this one is easily Van Halen all the way.

[KevShmev]

Kev, Chinese Democracy is a fantastic album if you can get past the vocals. Personally I enjoy them

I am not a fan of Rose's voice most of the time.  Heck, Paradise City is a classic, yet I think his voice ruins it.  I still remember the debut of the video being this massive thing MTV was promoting.  The song started, and man, that intro was freaking incredible. I was like, this song is gonna kick so much ass.  And then he started singing...ugh.

When it comes to albums I would put Appetite over any Van Halen album, but VH debut and Fair Warning are only two VH albums that I consider great, VH II and WACF are very good, 1984 is average and pretty commercial and Diver Down is weak.
I always found Illusions albums really underrated by a lot of rock fans, who claim that GnR have only one strong album - AFD.
And I agree that Van Halen in their catalog don't have such musically creative and deep songs as Estranged and Civil War.

Okay, but I doubt anyone listens to VH expecting anything deep.   You listen to VH to hear kick ass hard rock about partying, girls and drinking.

Aint Talkin Bout Love pretty much says it all. People get all gooey over Eruption and Ed's soloing, but it was his rhythm playing that really defined VH. You listen to an instrumental version of ATBL or an isolated guitar track and then consider that he played this in 1977, when hard rock was Sin After Sin, Let there be Rock, and Cat Scratch Fever. It's almost an entirely new kind of music.

ATBL Instrumental

So true.  EVH was not just a bad ass soloist, but an incredible rhythm player.  He has more great riffs than you can shake a stick at.

[WildRanger]

Dave was a showman, and when he was on the edge, he was SHARP, and el Barto said it:  his weapon was his cock.  "I'll come out there and ball your girl", and he DID IT.   But no one got hurt. 

Is this real? Roth really balled someone else's girlfriends and he was not rejected by them and their boyfriends didn't get angry for that?   This is really interesting and surprising to me. Dave could do whatever he wanted.

[Art]

Born in 81, voted Van Halen. Never got into GnR excepet a couple of songs.

[bosk1]

I'm also curious if people in the 80's really know just how game-changing VH was. Damn near everything EVH did was new and fresh, and he combined it all so effortlessly into amazing riffs. He wasn't just coming up with clever riffs, he was playing riffs that nobody could have even envisioned. Combined with that tone of his he really changed things for everybody.

I can't say I truly appreciated how game-changing they were at the time.  But I knew when I first heard VH-I that it was different than anything I had ever heard.  And I'm pretty sure I have repeated here the story that Dave Meniketti of Y&T once told about the first time they interacted with Eddie, but I'll repeat it.

For context, keep in mind that although Y&T never managed to make that big leap from "big" to "huge," they were incredibly popular in the California club scene from the mid-'70s through early '80s.  Most of the bands we've all heard of that came up and got signed during that time opened for Y&T at one time or another.  They formed in the early/mid-'70s around the same time as Journey, and Herbie Herbert managed both bands at the time.  He toured both bands relentlessly around California, getting whatever gigs he could, whether it was club gigs, parties, county fairs, or whatever.  They were well-established and well-known by the late '70s.

I don't know exactly when it was, but I believe it was relatively close before the 1977 Starwood gig when Mo Ostin and Ted Templeman of Warner Bros. saw Van Halen and subsequently signed them, that Van Halen was booked to open for Y&T.  Joey Alves of Y&T went and either listened to the VH sound check or heard Eddie playing his dressing room, or something like that.  He came back to the Y&T dressing room and told the rest of the guys that they had to hear this Van Halen kid play.  They all laughed it off and made fun of Eddie's name.  Then they heard him play and were left in awe, both because of how good and how different he was.  They knew from that moment that Eddie was going to be huge and that he was a game-changer.  (and that also was the start of a very long, sometimes friendly and sometimes antagonistic, competitive relationship between the two bands)

[Samsara]

Hearing Appetite for the first time would probably be in the top 5 things, musically, that had the strongest impact on shaping my life. GnR pretty much changed my life in less than an hour and are still one of my favorite bands ever... I look up Van Halen related things when I want to laugh - even their hits make me cringe (You'll get some leg tonight fooor shoooore!).

Age, I think, has a lot to do with it. If I am remembering correctly, you're still pretty young, right? If you were a teenager in the 70s, the whole scene and vibe was totally different. So its not just the music, its the timing when that music comes out. I admit, hearing that line from VH NOW, makes me cringe. But I know people who were early teenagers in the late 70s who swear by the DLR era, mostly BECAUSE of DLR and his antics. It's just timing.

For me, its Guns N Roses. Specifically the Appetite-era GnR that lasted through Lies. That band was gritty, it was street, it was REAL. And all of that poured out from the music. It gave a credibility to hard rock that had become so polished at that point. I wasn't even a huge fan at the time, but I remember when I heard them in 1987, I totally understood why they got so big, so fast. And that sorta catapulted other bands to get away from the polish a bit, and get a bit tougher.

To this day, Appetite remains as one of my top albums of all time. No VH at all in my top-10. But GnR? Yeah, Appetite is just pure Aerosmith/LA Street hard rock. Damn good stuff. They were never the same after Lies. The Illusion records have their moments (Estranged, You Could Be Mine, November Rain, Don't Cry, etc.), but Appetite man, that's just another level entirely.

[The Walrus]

Hearing Appetite for the first time would probably be in the top 5 things, musically, that had the strongest impact on shaping my life. GnR pretty much changed my life in less than an hour and are still one of my favorite bands ever... I look up Van Halen related things when I want to laugh - even their hits make me cringe (You'll get some leg tonight fooor shoooore!).

Age, I think, has a lot to do with it. If I am remembering correctly, you're still pretty young, right? If you were a teenager in the 70s, the whole scene and vibe was totally different. So its not just the music, its the timing when that music comes out. I admit, hearing that line from VH NOW, makes me cringe. But I know people who were early teenagers in the late 70s who swear by the DLR era, mostly BECAUSE of DLR and his antics. It's just timing.

I'm 28. I did get into GnR when I was about 10 years old, but I was familiar with Van Halen tunes at the same time and just couldn't connect with any of that music. GnR however had the heaviness, the balls, the metaphorical 'fuck you' and middle finger attitude all over their sound. VH was always more of a 'party' vibe, GnR came to fuck shit up and leave you spinning by the time they were done. I do think the era matters; I probably would've been into Van Halen if I was a teen in those days, but who knows, like I said I got into GnR before my balls even dropped, so whatever  The first time I ever heard You Could Be Mine was actually on the UYI2 concert film. My parents got that for me for my birthday about a year after I started really getting into GnR, and I remember watching it late that night, on a schoolnight, and being absolutely blown away by the fast vocals toward the end of You Could Be Mine. Pure, unfiltered, raw anger and intensity. Downloaded the song the next day and that just further cemented my love for the band.

And that song is a prime example of why I think GnR categorically destroys Van Halen in every single way: it's articulate, measured, and carefully calculated execution of complex emotions. It's not just anger in their music, it's deep frustration, and it's articulated intelligently when it needs to be and it's straightforward when it wants to be blunt. There's party music in there especially on Appetite, but it's much cooler than [insert DLR sounds here] 'wahoo baby baby babyhoneysugardarlin' let's get CRAZY in here!' 

[Stadler]

Well you hit the nail on the head.  If you didn’t feel that frustration or anger, the music was lost on you.  Remember Appetite came out not long before grunge which was also bleak (To this day I admire Dirt by Alice in Chains but is just too dark a record to really sit through repeatedly).  VH was more aggressive than a lot of the music of that time but in a good way. Maybe it’s where I lived but we were not the kids to go out and bash mailboxes or beat up other kids; we would pound a few beers, drive down to the lake, hang out, make out (if we were lucky), and VH was the soundtrack to a lot of that. 

[The Walrus]

You're telling me The Warriors isn't a documentary on life in the 70s?

[ZirconBlue]

I was born in 1971, and 1984 was my first Hard Rock album.  But I prefer G'n'R.  I don't really care how influential or game-changing something is, I just like what I like. 

[Dream Team]

Born in 67, VH for me because of lack of quantity on the part of GnR. I actually like UYI better than AFD. But anyway Bart nailed it on Eddie’s rhythm playing - and Dave’s vocals were GREAT, much prefer him to Hagar. For VH it’s all about the first 4 albums for me, plus a couple from 1984.

[jammindude]

To this day I admire Dirt by Alice in Chains but is just too dark a record to really sit through repeatedly

From the same time period.....you've obviously never listened to The Downward Spiral. 

Breathtaking album, but OMG do I feel like I've "been through it" when I hear it.   Can't listen to it non-stop in one sitting.

[Cruithne]

I don't doubt what it did for reinventing guitar playing, but as an album from a musical standpoint, I don't see the appeal. Most of the songs (Eruption aside) just feel like above-average songs of the era with some amazing guitarwork thrown in. Surely it revolutionised a lot for guitarists & rock in general, but when I hear something like "one of the greatest rock albums of all time", I dunno, I guess I expect a bit more focus on actual songwriting. & songs like Janie's Cryin' or Atomic Punk I find actively bad, even beyond the point where EVH's guitar-playing can save them.

Idk, I wish I got it, but I don't 

Exact same feeling for me. Over the course of their first 5 records there's really only a couple of songs I enjoy and I just don't get what it is people like about it. 1984 is the only album the original line up put out that I like more than one song from. For Unlawful... is the only Van Halen album I particularly like and there's still a couple of total clunkers on that. Everything about early Van Halen has the air of "you had to be there", particularly Eruption.

Guns, on the other hand, did three wonderful studio albums that I love in Appetite and the Use Your Illusions. I get why people don't like Axl's voice but for me it worked perfectly for that band. But then Guns were huge just around the point where I was first developing a love for rock & metal so maybe I just happened to be there.

[Stadler]

I don't doubt what it did for reinventing guitar playing, but as an album from a musical standpoint, I don't see the appeal. Most of the songs (Eruption aside) just feel like above-average songs of the era with some amazing guitarwork thrown in. Surely it revolutionised a lot for guitarists & rock in general, but when I hear something like "one of the greatest rock albums of all time", I dunno, I guess I expect a bit more focus on actual songwriting. & songs like Janie's Cryin' or Atomic Punk I find actively bad, even beyond the point where EVH's guitar-playing can save them.

Idk, I wish I got it, but I don't 

Exact same feeling for me. Over the course of their first 5 records there's really only a couple of songs I enjoy and I just don't get what it is people like about it. 1984 is the only album the original line up put out that I like more than one song from. For Unlawful... is the only Van Halen album I particularly like and there's still a couple of total clunkers on that. Everything about early Van Halen has the air of "you had to be there", particularly Eruption.

Guns, on the other hand, did three wonderful studio albums that I love in Appetite and the Use Your Illusions. I get why people don't like Axl's voice but for me it worked perfectly for that band. But then Guns were huge just around the point where I was first developing a love for rock & metal so maybe I just happened to be there.

If it matters to you, I'm old enough to be on both sides of this.   Jimi Hendrix.   I'd hear his songs on the radio and think "who did this guy blow to become a legend?!?"  And I don't remember how, but somehow I got the first three albums in deluxe form and decided I should listen deep, not just the hits, but the records the way Jimi intended.  And of the, say, 45 or so tracks, there had to have been 15 or 20 moments where I went "WTF? Uli Jon Roth stole that!" or "WTF?  Steve Vai played that almost note for note on XYZ!"  And it hit me.   I'm still not the biggest Hendrix fan - his singing - but I'm able to see that he was doing amazing shit almost ten years in advance of the rest of the world.  Other side of the coin:  I see artists like  Nirvana (who do nothing for me) or Lady Gaga (who I love, and for the record, loved BEFORE the recent "Shallow" nonsense) who are viewed as god-like, and I'm like "Wait a second.  I saw this all before (The Ramones, Madonna)". 

I think there are a ton of really successful, really talented artists in music.   Axl is one of them, and after seeing Slash now three times (both with Guns and solo) I'm starting to think he's truly one of the all time greats.   But there are only a handful of guys that universally made you go and pick up a guitar, even if you didn't ever sound like them or ever even was able to play their music.   It is not up for debate that Eddie is one of those guys.   

It's kind of the same with the Beatles; some of the songs on those first couple albums just don't give the impression of being transcendent.  And yet... how many artists are there who make no bones that their entire world changed on February 9, 1964?  I didn't become anything special (musically), but I can tell you EXACTLY where I was when I heard VHI.   (John S****'s bedroom, I can even give you the street address). 

[KevShmev]

If it matters to you, I'm old enough to be on both sides of this.   Jimi Hendrix.   I'd hear his songs on the radio and think "who did this guy blow to become a legend?!?"  And I don't remember how, but somehow I got the first three albums in deluxe form and decided I should listen deep, not just the hits, but the records the way Jimi intended.  And of the, say, 45 or so tracks, there had to have been 15 or 20 moments where I went "WTF? Uli Jon Roth stole that!" or "WTF?  Steve Vai played that almost note for note on XYZ!"  And it hit me.   I'm still not the biggest Hendrix fan - his singing - but I'm able to see that he was doing amazing shit almost ten years in advance of the rest of the world.  Other side of the coin:  I see artists like  Nirvana (who do nothing for me) or Lady Gaga (who I love, and for the record, loved BEFORE the recent "Shallow" nonsense) who are viewed as god-like, and I'm like "Wait a second.  I saw this all before (The Ramones, Madonna)". 

I think there are a ton of really successful, really talented artists in music.   Axl is one of them, and after seeing Slash now three times (both with Guns and solo) I'm starting to think he's truly one of the all time greats.   But there are only a handful of guys that universally made you go and pick up a guitar, even if you didn't ever sound like them or ever even was able to play their music.   It is not up for debate that Eddie is one of those guys.   

It's kind of the same with the Beatles; some of the songs on those first couple albums just don't give the impression of being transcendent.  And yet... how many artists are there who make no bones that their entire world changed on February 9, 1964?  I didn't become anything special (musically), but I can tell you EXACTLY where I was when I heard VHI.   (John S****'s bedroom, I can even give you the street address).

Well said.

I am not much of a fan of Hendrix - I like a few songs and that is it - but is influence is undeniable.  That same applies to EVH, who I am a big fan of, as a musician, not as a person (he is a POS).

[Lethean]

I'm not a fan of either, but I voted for GNR because I find them way more tolerable than DLR.