VAN HALEN — Van Halen (review)

Album · 1978 · Hard Rock

3/5 · 2016-09-19
Warthur

Eeeeh... fine, okay, if you want a showcase for what was at the time cutting-edge guitar playing and is now a classic technique which set the bar for hard rock going forwards, then yes, the self-titled debut from Van Halen is pretty good as far as that goes. But whilst Eddie Van Halen certainly gets to show off his chops a lot, as a whole the songs found here leave me kind of cold. Take, for instance, the cover of You Really Got Me by The Kinks, which is kind of blown out of the water by the original. Perhaps the issue is that the album puts Eddie so far at front and centre that everyone else is eclipsed - with the result that you end up with one really epochal performance from Eddie and a more lukewarm outing from the rest of the band, which adds up to three star "eh, it's alright I guess"-ness.

more than 2 years ago
Permalink
Report #325442

Share this review

Review Comments

Post a public comment below | Send private message to the reviewer

Please login to post a shout

Unitron wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Women and Children First and Fair Warning are my favorites, but I absolutely love Atomic Punk. One of my favorite VH songs, as well as one of their most metal.

siLLy puPPy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I just personally love lisitening to this one. Not only do i love the guitar wankery but the best songs of their career are on this one. Other than Eruption the focus is on the interaction of the band. I would say David Lee Roth is more the showcase on this one. How can you not LOOOOOVE Ice Cream Man? I love this one and is more than relevant as a modern day listen. Just my two cents worth

Warthur wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Disagree there, Colt.

- 3*s corresponds, according to the official site descriptions, as "Good, but non-essential". Since my take is that the album is an OK technical showcase but hasn't dated well, I think that's a reasonable enough description.

- We don't have time machines. None of us can go back in time to listen to an album the way it was heard in the era it was released - we can't simply unlisten to all the stuff we have heard since. The fact that an album was amazing at the time but has dated poorly is relevant to any review written here; people who haven't heard the album already won't get to experience it as those who heard it at release did, and those who did hear it before will already have their own opinions about it.

Colt wrote:

more than 2 years ago

"Eeeeh... fine, okay, if you want a showcase for what was at the time cutting-edge guitar playing and is now a classic technique which set the bar for hard rock going forwards..." Then 3*'s. IMO albums should be judged by the era they were released. Believe me that album was amazing at the time when compared to it's contemporaries. Hey ho, we all have the right to our own thoughts and tastes :)

Vim Fuego wrote:

more than 2 years ago

I do agree. Van Halen have the odd good song, but there's so much they have produced which is below mediocre. The talent of all involved is unquestionable, but the band is way, way overrated

siLLy puPPy wrote:

more than 2 years ago

Not agreed