@BrotherEarth said:

There seems to be a huge disconnect between the criteria used to judge a show on Phish Net vs my observed crowd reactions.

It depends on what exactly you mean by "criteria," which you haven't defined. And "crowd reactions"? Seriously? Do you realize that ever since the songs first debuted, the crowd goes nuts for songs like Bouncin, Sparkle, Sample in a Jar, [insert names of songs you don't care to ever hear again] etc etc etc? That's what we do as Phish fans. We -- as a crowd -- typically react positively at shows to songs that Phish chooses to play. The shows would probably start to suck, and Phish would quit touring, if we all crossed our arms and let out a huge sigh, audible to the band, when they started up Possum or Down with Disease. And even when Phish begins to play comparably unpopular songs (like Time Turns Elastic) at shows, thousands still routinely show appreciation for such songs... while thousands of other folks might rush the washrooms. "Crowd reactions" doesn't cut it as a "criteria" for reviewing a show, since IMO the "crowd reactions" have been awesome at every Phish show I've seen and heard since the early 1990s.

Most of the people at a show haven't heard every version of Tweezer, YEM, Mike's Groove, SOAM, Stash, Bowie, Antelope, etc, not to mention most if not all of the Phish shows in circulation. The folks reviewing shows for the Phish.net blog have a ludicrous amount of Phish listening experience compared to the average Phish fan at a show. For some of us, this was true even in the early 1990s. (And if you're reading this, you're not an "average Phish fan at a show" by the way. Phish fans who regularly visit online Phish websites make up a small percentage of those who attend Phish concerts.)

If a Phish.net blogger reviewed a Phish show from the perspective of a typical showgoer, nearly every review would be a rave about how wonderful everything was -- "energy" or "vibe," setlist, sound, lights, etc. If you want to read that, you'll likely find such a review elsewhere online. (aka the "It's All Hood" review) Go for it. The Phish.net bloggers necessarily criticize Phish shows from the perspective of not only a show-going vet, but a show-listening vet. Their experience is unlikely to conform with yours unless (at the very least) you share a similar base of Phish experience, but even then, of course, you may not see ear-to-ear with them on everything. The folks behind the scenes on Phish.net get into debates all the time about the music, unless something is demonstrably superior to most if not all of the versions of the song in question over the course of Phish history (e.g., SuperBall's Mound and Mighty Quinn).

We don't always agree with each other, of course, and don't expect everyone else to agree with us, either. And the blog posts are of course just the two cents of the blogger in question, and not that of "Phish.net." But unless you take an "It's All Hood" approach, I would bet $$$$$ that the more Phish experience you have, the more likely your opinions about the music will jive with that of a typical Phish.net blogger's more often than not. Your perspective will change the more Phish you hear and the more Phish shows you see. Thankfully we're all different, of course, and there's room under the tent for everyone's opinions -- no matter how profoundly ignorant they may appear to be to you.