Van Halen better with Roth or Hagar?

Roth or Hagar

  • Roth

    Votes: 512 80.6%

  • Hagar

    Votes: 123 19.4%
  • Total voters
    635
Band might have been more interesting if they had been an instrumentally-oriented ensemble, a "Ventures" of Hair Metal, if you will.
 
I voted Roth. The band sounded good with Hagar but, they lost the style that only a self-absorbed, egomaniac like DLR could bring to the mix.
 
Hagar all the way for me. Roth was a good front man, with at best, a fair voice. Hagar brought real musicianship and talent to the role.

A good way to spot the difference is to look At both of their solo work.
 
I am a fan of both, but have to go with Hagar after hearing both live. Roth can jump around and put on a show, but Hagar has the vocals and musical talent. He also was more interactive with the audience on the shows I saw them - he answered questions and gave you some history on the band, songs and what they been through.

But that is my limited experience, I spin both often.
 
Obviously back in the day Diamond Dave was a top notch front man, but time has caught up with him. Dave was perfect for the vintage era of VH. But Sammy has always had the best voice.
It's really a tough call, but I go old school everytime.
Diamond Dave winner.
 
I personally don't think fronting an over-the-top glam/hair/rock band has much of anything to do with singing ability. It's all about being a rock star. And David Lee Roth is a rock star.

Hagar takes himself too seriously to be a rock star. Riiiiight now...he's probably posting anonymously on a VH internet forum about how he's better than Roth.
 
I voted Roth, but the answer isn't as easy as I expected. The thing of it is, I really, really like a lot of the Van Hagar stuff. It was really good music. I grew up on Van Halen, though, and bought every one of their albums day and date, and the "real" Van Halen is with DLR. But I liked Sammy prior to his joining VH, and it worked MUCH better than that sort of thing generally does.
 
Bigerik said:
A good way to spot the difference is to look At both of their solo work.
Click to expand...

That will certainly show the difference in their solo careers but IMO, the whole was more than the sum of the parts with Roth. It wasn't "Van Halen with DLR", it was just Van Halen.
 
Jagger's solo work is forgettable. Robert Plant's was forgettable until recently (The Honeydrippers anyone?). Daltrey? DLR knew the role of the frontman. And often that role doesn't work alone.
 
avguytx said:
Everything after the 1984 release with Hagar coming on board was mediocre at best, in my opinion, although it sold well. I first saw VH in 1978 on their debut LP opening up for Blue Oyster Cult and they blew everyone away. I've seen both iterations live during the heyday and both were great live but my vote still goes to the Roth era. Now Hagar by himself was another story...he rocked. Same thing goes with him, Michael Anthony, Joe Satriani, and whoever the drummer is with the band Chickenfoot. That's some good stuff...
Click to expand...
avguytx, I think the drummer for Chickenfoot is the original drummer for the Red Hot Chili Peppers maybe? I forget it name.
 
Sammy!

Sammy Hagar made Van Halen a better band. The songs that came out when he joined the band were significantly better!
So many great albums with Hagar! Roth could jump but no longer.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

thedelihaus
Van Halen and David Lee Roth studio album/tour 2011
2
Replies
22
Views
1K
RSL'67
RSL'67
Theophilus Punoval
Opinion Obstinace
Replies
17
Views
1K
Theophilus Punoval
Theophilus Punoval
Z
Van Halen Releasing First Live Album With David Lee Roth
2 3 4
Replies
62
Views
2K
Pio1980
Pio1980
needforspeed
Looks Like New Van Halen Release Will Happen
Replies
0
Views
441
needforspeed
needforspeed
needforspeed
Hagar Forming "SuperGroup"
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
Edriz
Edriz
Back
Top Bottom