In a new Interview with Planet Rock magazine, Sammy Hagar spoke about David Lee Roth.
“It wasn’t even a blip on my radar.
“I don’t respect Dave‘s artistry, but I do think he’s clever and a great showman and what he did with VAN HALEN in the early days was fantastic. VAN HALEN couldn’t have made it without him.
“God bless Dave, but he refuses to acknowledge that VAN HALEN with me was even more successful than VAN HALEN with him, and that’s very stupid of him. That’d be like me not acknowledging what he did for the band before I joined: that would be stupid, wouldn’t it?”
Hagar also spoke about the circumstances that led to the end of his first stint with the band.
“We had eight years of [huge success], and then suddenly people in the band started changing… and it wasn’t me and it wasn’t Mike [Anthony, bass],”
“The ‘Balance’ record was like pulling teeth, things got very dysfunctional by then. Drugs and alcohol and insecurity and bad management killed that band.”
Sorry Sam, but that’s BS. With mr Hagar, it was more pop/disco than true hard rock.
Pop? Disco? Ha ha. Van Halen was more pop with Roth. I mean ” jump” was ridiculously pop. Hagar has done rock before Dave was in diapers. Yeah, they had focused on writing mainstream, but that’s been Eddies vision since the first album and “you really got me” and others on the first CD warranted Warner Bros to push RADIO play. Otherwise their is no vehicle for VH to blow up unless they go the underground route. They’ve always been a pop rock band. It’s just that Eddie’s Innovative guitar playing, his style, was signature, and an event that has changed the history of Music literally.
Wrong! The first VH album was by far the of all time best in my opinion! The fact that it’s the only one I can listen to nowadays proves that. It was/is and always will be a classic. Every song on that album rocks from start to finish. The rest of the Van Halen albums are all mediocre. They made a huge mistake ditching the leather & chains after the first album and going commercial with spandex! It was such a disappointment! Then when they got rid of David Lee Roth and became Van Hagar, it was like Van Halen ceased to exist! I always liked Sammy Hagar. He was by far the best opening act for any band!
I saw him 2 dozen times as an opener for other bands and he never disappoints. Well that is until he became Van Hagar! Still like Sammy! However, after a few Van Hagar shows the Van Halen magic was lost forever!
Sorry but your opinion is not fact. And saying it’s the only one you can listen to does not mean it is the best. Fact and opinion are different beasts.
Totally agree. I think Ted Templeman made the first album what it is. I’m pretty sure he picked the songs and had an influence on the look of the band and the sleeve. I listened to ‘Zero’ and I feel he also had some musical input. Would love to talk to the man.
I agree 100%. If Van Halen started with Sammy, they would have been as forgettable as Sammy’s solo career minus a couple hits. Dave’s contributions were just as important as Eddie’s playing.
The operative word is were for Dave. Sammy is still rocking at 75. Dave couldn’t carry a tune in a bucket.
He said more successful, as in album sales and chart activity. It isn’t about preference, but overall success.
Very true, but he said more successful.. meaning awards album sales tours etc the Hagar era was definitely more successful in all those areas those are facts but I do agree with your comment.
Jump is supposed to be hard rock? It failed then.
The numbers don’t lie. Van Halen had far more commercial success with Sammy. You are entitled to your opinion on which version you liked better, but, the numbers tell the real story.
Disco? Your an idiot. Roth was not a great singer. All he had was his fake scream. Wowww ohhhhh!
Not really if you look at 1984 Eddie called that album the beginning of the new VH and the direction that he wanted and was heading towards. With Sammy being in the band just help project that insight for Eddie 10 folds. Music marriage made in heaven
Can’t Sammy open his mouth without mentioning Van Halen?
Not true at all. Van Halen was the best with David Lee Roth.
Andy my Sammy’s nose has grown.
Music taste is subjective. So I dont care about others opinions. For me, I like both Roth and Hagar version of VH. They were different, but still VH and as good as the other.
A voice of reason! Thank you! Music is not a contest, and liking one doesn’t mean you can’t like another, and everyone is entitled to their favorite. I would enjoy listening to Ed playing with ANYONE, or by himself. Dave is a great showman, Sammy is a more talented musician, Micheal was a brilliant but tortured artist, and I can still enjoy Gary. ( I know, I’m probably responsible for all 3 CDs of VH3 that sold, but even that album can make me smile) and I can still love Satriani, Hoey, Martone, Johnson…
Just listen to the songs they are playing since Eddie’s passing. Mostly Roth era. RIP Eddie !
For me, it’s like this: KFC may sell far more chicken, but there’s a little hole-in-the-wall joint here in Jacksonville on Myrtle Avenue that has wings that will bring tears of joy to your eyes. True indeed, Van Hagar was a far more commercial band, made crap-loads of money, but for me, they were Journey on steroids. Van Hagar was a better band, but Van Halen with Dave was a cultural phenomenon…
Spot on Mr. Bryant.
Hagar’s ego is showing on this one. But I can’t say that he isn’t right either.
I ask people all the time what lead singer was better and without a DOUBT David lee Roth wins period!!!!
I saw both incarnations of VH. I Never did like Dave, and he has become an embarrassment on stage. Sammy still rocks!
Yes he does still rock. Sammy never got lost in dope like Roth did. Just a shadow of his former self.
Van Halen with Dave was just a successful cover band, with an incredible guitarist. Van Hagar was a supergroup. 4 incredible musicians pushing each other to the bests of their abilities.
I don’t care much for Van Halen, no matter who the lead singer is. But what he’s trying to say here is that they sold more records and made more money when HE was in the band than when Dave was. And the numbers back him up. If “more records sold” and “more money made” = “more successful” (and I would venture that they do), then he is correct. Whether or not you like him.
If “more successful” means number of albums sold then Sammy is right. But who determines what more successful really is? Sammy has a better voice, is a better musician, sold more records, but a lot of people prefer Roth era VH (me included). So what is success?
Van Halen was absolutely way better with David Lee Roth
Roth absolutely wins the Van Halen commerce battle with 57 million sales worldwide to Hagar’s 27 million worldwide sales. …
However, it took seven albums for Roth to reach that number (Van Halen in 1978, Van Halen II in 1979, Women and Children First in 1980, Fair Warning in 1981, Diver Down in 1982, 1984 in 1984, and A Different Kind of Truth in 2012), while Hagar hit his mark with four albums (5150 in 1986, OU812 in 1988, For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge in 1991, and Balance in 1995).
You can’t measure success by profits. Because the income inequality gap grew. You measure it by popularity. We all know the names of countless Van Halen songs with Roth and only a few with Hagar. Sorry bud it ain’t all about cash flow.
I think the Van Halen with Sammy was the best and most successful of them all. Thats a fact. Just compare them to the billboard charts. I know it’s a matter of opinion of what taste you have Dave or Sammy. Dave was a better front man and Sammy was a better singer.
Both versions of Van Halen were hugely successful in they’re own unique ways and it’s only a personal preference of the listener as to which era they think is best . To have two mega versions of the band is testament to one man only …. the late great Eddie Van Halen .
You know It seems like everything went down hill when Sammy took over. Ed’s playing was not the same with Sammy’s voice and songwriting. Technically better does not mean anything when the songs are soft and safe. Just listen to Fair Warning and it becomes a joke that Sammy thinks his stuff with Ed is that good.
He seems like a super cool guy but you can’t rewrite history with what was witnessed with classic vh. Please Sammy try and move on it’s gross you are trying to compete with the original line up.
Hagar is correct in that they moved more product, and made more money in his era, so those of you that prefer the Roth era can calm down.
You can’t argue with hard facts like math.
That said I still prefer the Roth era Van Halen musically. It has a harder edge, at least up until 5150. That was the transition record to the more pop sound.
Gary doesn’t get enough love.
DLR was better and you know it. It has 2 be killing you inside but youll never admit that Eddie and Dave never got along and They FU when they fired. Dave because 2 me Dave was the singer Not you Hagar never like your singing anyway thats when the band died and no they couldn’t have made it without him Eddie was the best but without DLR they wouldn’t never made and you know keep lying to yourself but inside its has 2 be killing you.
DLR was better and you know it Hagar your singing sucked 2 me.Thats when the band died it has 2. Kill you inside doesn’t it..
Love Sammy, but global sales of just VH 1 and 1984 combine for over 30 million, which is more than ALL Sammy era global sales. DLR era albums are over 2/3 of all VH global sales. Is Sammy talking tours or what? On just album sales, like it or not…..Dave is the champ.
You’re all wrong. Both versions sucked.
Who cares. A couple of low talent rockers arguing over an overrated pop rock band.
Who F5*king cares. Its all personal taste. They both had their moments in the band.
Sam is spot on! Roth couldn’t touch Sammy’s tunes with VH yet Sammy sings David’s stuff far better! Roth is no more than a washed up clown. He can’t sing anymore yet tries and it’s awful. He really couldn’t sing back with VH.
With David, Eddie and Mike, Van Halen became the great band they were…..Sammy just had to step in to that success the others had already established, making it quite easy. Sure , the Sammy era may have had more financial success, but without the road already being paved, I don’t know if it would have worked out the same way……with that said, I still think the Sammy era of VH was great, but it didn’t have the same pizzazz as the David era.
Not a big deal in the scheme of things but there wouldn’t have been a “Van Halen” for Sammy to step into if Dave hadn’t participated in building it. Lots of garage bands don’t get out of the garage. They became famous with Dave. Sammy stepped into something that Dave and the other boys had already built. In the infamous words of Barack Hussein Obama, “You didn’t build that”.
Maybe more successful, but I’ll take the Roth Van Halen over Sammy’s Van Halen every day of the week and twice on Sunday!
Just went to to the riaa website and counted the Roth album sales at 39 million . Then I counted the Sammy album sales at 17 million . That’s all usa sales for both . Maybe Ecuador bought the rest the Sammy that are not there. .