With David Lee Roth rejoining Van Halen for a new album and tour in 2012, it's time to revive the endless debate.
Who was the best singer in Van Halen, Roth or Sammy Hagar? (No offense to Gary Cherone, who appeared on one Van Halen album.)
Roth was the crux of Van Halen. Hagar was a complement.
There's something to be said about the original lineup. Even if replacements are more talented, by default they are not vintage.
Was Eric Carr a better drummer than Peter Criss? Technically, yes, but KISS was at its best with Criss because it was the classic lineup.
Was Kenny Jones a better drummer than Keith Moon? Perhaps technically (although this is a separate debate), but The Who was The Who because of Moon's presence. No substituting Coke for gin.
Ditto Peter Gabriel and Phil Collins. Ritchie Blackmore and Tommy Bolin. Bon Scott and Brian Johnson. The list could go on.
Which brings us back to the Roth-Hagar debate.
It's difficult to top the power and energy of those first four Van Halen albums (VH recorded six with Roth, four with Hagar). If you put "Van Halen I," "Van Halen II," "Women and Children First," and "Fair Warning" up against the Hagar-era "5150," "OU812," "For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge" and "Balance," you'd find a stark contrast in vibe and feel.
With Roth, VH delivered raw animal magnetism, songs from the gut, primal vinyl energy. With Hagar, the songs were more smoothly structured (catchy hooks), glossily produced and approachable. And both rocked.
Each singer brought something special to the band. Many critics thought Van Halen could never be the same without Roth and they were wrong. Hagar was the perfect choice for the band to extend its career through the end of the '80s and into the '90s.
But when you look back at Van Halen's body of work, which do you prefer? The frat-brat demeanor of Diamond Dave or the cabo-wabo sunsplash of the Red Rocker?
For nostalgia sake, Roth gets the nod.