Was'nt he just the worst singer in the history of rock? I think he's even worse than Bruce Springstien. He had the most pathetic scream ever. The only thing that made VanHalen any good was Eddie. And even he played with about as much emotion as a carpet beetle.
2006-06-06 07:45:58 · 19 answers · asked by WhiteNacho 1 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Music
I'm not a huge Van Halen fan, but the thing David Lee Roth had was personality, a presence on stage and on record. Most of the great rockers have that, whether they have a great voice or not.
A great voice only gets you so far - think some of the American Idol finalists. But charisma can make you a star.
But I agree, David Lee Roth doesn't have a great voice. And Eddie Van Halen was a great guitar player.
2006-06-06 07:50:54 · answer #1 · answered by MASaintFan 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Van Halen put out some good hits like Panama and Running with the Devil. Bruce Springstein and probably Neil Young are the worst singers and Led Zeppelin the greatest rock band of all time dude.
2006-06-06 07:49:32 · answer #2 · answered by toughguy2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"Diamond Dave" was unique then as he is now, he was in a catagory to himself. Eddie, was and is one ot the greatest guitarist ever to pound an axe!!! ANY musician will tell you that! you non musicians havent got the right to judge other musicians on styles, feelings, and the art of being the lead of one of the Greatest Bands in Rock History!!!!!
If you are not yet convinced, pick up a mic, or a guitar and reproduce what is done on stage at a live show... short of making yourself look like a total *** that is!!!!!
Van Halen stands the test of time, as does all of its members, both current and past...!
2006-06-06 07:58:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't matter how bad or good roth's voice was one he put on a great show and two he was teamed with the inventor of the finger tap and one of the baddest guitarist to date. So you can do what you want when you have that combo because the fans will love whatever you do.
2006-06-06 07:54:09 · answer #4 · answered by Jack 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, van halen was better with him when he was the singer, and van halen's music sucked after her left and was replaced with sammy hagar. He may not be a great singer but in many of his songs he was annoying with his little conversations and talks (e.g.: unchained, panama, etc.). His little "whimpers" or "screams" he did where most of the time annoying(e.g. you really got me, beautiful girls, etc.). Overall, even if you don't like van halen too much, they were most definitely a better band when David Lee Roth sang for them.
2006-06-06 07:52:21 · answer #5 · answered by redhightops92 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
But still...who wouldn't go see a Van Halen reunion tour? I'd pay an arm and a leg to see it and I'm not anything of a VH fan! That and the Police...and Genesis
2006-06-06 07:48:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Even worse than Bruce Springstein." That cracked me up! Until now I thought I was the only person who doesn't like Bruce.
2006-06-06 07:48:47 · answer #7 · answered by flamingo_sandy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I knew he made some good music back in the 80s.
2006-06-06 07:47:50 · answer #8 · answered by nvsweets2006 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dang, how many platinum albums have you participated in, anyway?
You aren't posing a question, you're just spouting abuse. The forum for abuse is down the hall.
2006-06-06 07:47:52 · answer #9 · answered by Grendle 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Dave's singing blue grass now
2006-06-06 07:48:51 · answer #10 · answered by fadded 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋