Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveB 
I was tempted to include Pearl Jam, but it's pretty subjective where the run begins and ends (personally, I think No Code broke up an almost perfect run, but a lot of people love that one).
|
I'd personally include
No Code in that run. The garage-rock feel of the rockers and the intimate nature of the ballads opened up the band's sound in ways that was unexpected at the time.
Yield and
Binaural is when the band's consistency started becoming a major issue for me. They picked up speed again with
Riot Act and the self-titled, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chavez 
I dunno, I don't have much love for Houses of the Holy....and that's completely disregarding the disposable Song Remains the Same soundtrack.
|
When I created this topic in the back of my head, Zeppelin was the other band that immediately came to mind other than VH, then I remembered that I wasn't too fond of
Led Zeppelin III. Not bad by any means, but it doesn't hold its ground from front to back like their other albums.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu 
This is remarkably predictable coming from me, and I don't know how we're defining "run,"
|
Greatest runs = quality, consistency, time-frame, and artistic growth should be taken into account; and by using "greatest" I had no intention of limiting the discussion to the most popular artists...naturally, a knee-jerk reaction is to namecheck classic rock bands and what have you
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Elvis 
Re: Van Halen
A fun band, but can we really call the Diamond Dave era diverse? VH 1 & 2 , if memory serves, were pretty interchangeable. Great Pop-Rock-nothing more, nothing less. Diver Down is a lukewarm dry run for 1984. Uneven as Hell, with maybe the worst cover of all time on it (Oh, Pretty Woman).
EDIT--Running on fumes this morning. Realize I kinda repeated your point. Anyways, dig the Van Halen, but critically it seems a stretch to put their run up with Dylan, The Stones, or Led Zep. As Artists they're just not in that league. They were always an empty cool.
|
Actually, I think the Diamond Dave era of VH is
underrated in many ways, and taken for granted. That incarnation of the band made it seem so easy and fun with what they were accomplishing that the notion of artistic merit could even be questionable. But there hasn't been (and likely won't ever be) a band of such ballsy display, ferocious energy, extraordinary chemistry, and bullet-proof musicianship all wrapped into one package since. There's a dark undercurrent all over
Fair Warning, even a mean-spirited tone, that few hard rock albums have tempted to approach.
1984 was like a rebirth for the band's sound (and, ironically, their final bid before Van Hagar sadly took over the landscape)--bringing the pop-rock pendulum to a whole new level (the use of synthesizers hasn't aged the album at all, which proves far ahead of the curve the band were aiming), while still keeping their party-anthem roots.
We'll have to disagree on '(Oh) Pretty Woman'. LOVE that cover, though the opening segue way of 'Intruder' really makes that cover come alive.
The Stones had an amazing run with
Beggars Banquet --->
Let It Bleed --->
Sticky Fingers --->
Exile On Main Street
however, I wouldn't say those 4 discs diversified their sound any more than Roth-era VH, other than
Exile On Main Street
The Stones peaked way too early with
Exile On Main Street. I'll always wonder what VH would've recorded next with Roth if he hadn't left, especially considering
1984 couldn't have been a better swan song.