UIC3 RECAP
This recap was a collaboration between @pzerbo and @lumpblockclod.
Phish closed out yet another successful tour at the UIC Pavilion tonight that has seen visits to an outstanding and diverse set of venues and witnessed a solid dose of innovative and thrilling jams. From the awe-inspiring natural majesty of the Gorge, to the shining spectacle of Phish under CK’s light’s at the Hollywood Bowl, to the blissfully peculiar hybrid of Vegas and Telluride that was Tahoe, and the history-drenched over-sized party of Outside Lands in Golden Gate Park, the tour remarkably gained yet more steam as it went indoors to conclude in Chicago. The quality of performances in Chi-town have caused even the most JadedVet™ to stand and applaud, with gloriously extended improvisation (“Waves” -> “Undermind” on 8/15 and “Down with Disease” on 8/16), debuts (“Babylon Baby”), rarities (“Let it Loose”), extended encores on both of the first two nights and all-around solid play. Heading into the final show of the leg, expectations ran high and, as always, anything was possible. Let’s dim the lights.
Uh, wow! “Colonel Forbin’s” opener? The first show-opener since 11/3/89 at the Tree Café in Portland, ME (1,249 shows), Trey opted against the narration to play the sequence straight into a well-played “Mockingbird.” A punchy “Gumbo” followed, great energy but typically restrained “for 3.0.” Then the shocker of the evening... nobody saw it coming... “Possum!” The 12th “Possum” in 31 shows this year (~39%), the work-horse of recent setlists, you’ll hear no complaints from this camp – the Outside Lands “Possum” was also ‘capital AW’ awesome, FWIW – and it rocked the house, as always.
Why... “Weigh!” The first of 2011 (last played 12/31/10 MSG), this version of “Weigh” perhaps referenced the many carnivore-friendly local culinary options (from @chopcg via @YEMblog: “Weigh is for all the fans who will be weighing themselves after gorging on Chicago pizza, hot dogs, Italian Beef & sausages.”) Then a crisp > into a perfectly placed “Divided Sky” that delivered the requisite “extra mustard” for said sausages, as it has for much of 2011. Then a much needed pause... ahh.
The set then slips back into second gear with a languid “Alaska” that provided a brief respite for folks to catch their breath before “Bathtub Gin.” This version stayed mostly within the lines – nothing quite approaching the Bethel version of 5/28/11, for example – but was surely satisfying for all in attendance, and after a brief pause gave way to the always high-powered “Maze.” Rocking hard– nothing out of the ordinary for recent versions. Then a high-energy “Cavern” and to-the-house “First Tube” closer, with the “crowd going apeshit” (@chopcg). Party time! Great set... fifteen minutes!
Set two starts out with the now ubiquitous “Crosseyed and Painless” (11 of its 23 performances have been in 2010-11) To be honest, typical of 3.0 “C+P” this version didn’t stray far from the main theme, before dissolving into a delightfully spacey wash with strong hints of “No Quarter” before cleanly, if not compellingly, dropping into the song proper (a relative shame in a run with little to complain about, since the Rhodes piano intro to “NQ” has the potential for a majestic segue every time they play it). No sooner did “No Quarter appear to open up into a jam than it morphed into “Timber.” “Timber,” which had been teased or hinted at several times this tour, in turn contained extended “Crosseyed” teases (SPOILER ALERT: this may become a theme). Much like “C+P,” “Timber” quickly became spacey before giving way to “Tweezer.” The band plowed right through the composed parts of “Tweezer,” before again opting for the spacey route.
“Caspian” follows and reins the energy in a bit before yielding to a welcome “Piper” whose jam was briefly reminiscent of the monster 2/16/03 Vegas “Piper,” (aka the “Viper”) before dissolving back into a spacey wash and returning to the “Crosseyed” chorus. Then, the funk: “Ghost!” Fantastic setlist call. Unfortunately (first world problem, no worries) a quick ripcord in favor of “Makisupa.”
Keyword referenced some of Trey’s favorite music ("Dank Sinatra," "Nat King Bowl," “Harry Chronic Jr.,” “Herby Hancock” and “Van Inhalin”) and, of course “Page’s House!” Then the bust-out of “Sleep” followed (last performed 8/7/09 at The Gorge, 105 shows). A typically brief but always welcome “Buffalo Bill” bent over next, giving way to the first set closer “Golgi Apparatus.” Then the penultimate second-set closer “Character Zero” took over, with even more “Crosseyed” teases. Then the “final answer” set closer: “Run Like an Antelope.” Not merely content for “C+P” teases, “Antelope” also delivered a “Makisupa” tease. The Phish always surprise, I suppose. “Fish’s House” drum solo! What an energetic, rocking, fun set! Well done, sirs.
“Funky Bitch” continues the charge with yet more “Crosseyed” vocal quotes, laying down yet more funky goodness. “Show of Life” is not nearly the perfect seltist choice for everyone, but creates some space before the best 2+ minutes in rock and roll, “Tweezer Reprise” with the now-obligatory “Crosseyed” vocal refrains throughout the song.
UIC3 was perhaps lighter on the jam and heavier (much) on the teases than the first two Chi-town, but there is no way to end talk of this run other than on a positive. Great show! Good times, Phish fans. Be well. We’ll see you back for recap duty over labor day weekend.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Phish.net
The Mockingbird Foundation
Can't wait to see what you write about the
Vultures -> Taste> Ya Mar -> Round Room -> The Lizards, ASIHTOS second set!
I'm not listening to the show so I have no way to tell, but tonight's set II looks like the kind of set that a lot of people were looking to get away from (ok maybe just me lol)- the ones where they play truncated versions of a dozen classics.
IMO, if you're going to play Crosseyed, Ghost, Tweezer, Timber, Caspian, Antelope, Piper & Zero in a set, its going to have to be insanely long to do them justice- it doesn't *need* to be that way, but I've never heard a set with that many 'jam songs' that actually flowed well together. Probably because its a relatively new development. Those are all great songs, but every one of their crowd pleasing reputations is derived from the versions where they were allowed to flourish and not be bottled up with a bunch of other songs.
The thing is, with the way Phish has been playing the last few nights they very well could have approached it with cohesion in mind. It will all come down to the way they improv. They've done some excellent concise segues- or if not segues- working a jam into a vibe that meshes with the next song's before starting said next song. But on the other hand, it's so reminiscent of a lot of recent sets where they rushed through a bunch of great material- presumably faster than they had intended to- and started the "encore" in the middle of the 2nd set.
I'd be happy to be proven wrong and have this be a Bethel-type show where each song feels wonderfully placed. The first 3/4 of the second set looks pretty smooth but I wouldn't be surprised if the wheels start to come off after Makisupa.
I'm hoping for the best, but prepared for this show to just be one of those ones where Phish is playing for the audience in front of them and not thinking about it in a larger context. Fine by me, after Waves-> Undermind-> Steam this band can do whatever they want to me and I'll beg for more
In 1998? Yes, most definitely. But as it happens more frequently, it starts to feel gimmicky. You know what would REALLY make Phish sound like they were engaged in their music and invested in their future as a band? More segments like Waves -> Undermind -> Steam where they go "Hey, people might not know these songs so well but they'll fit together perfectly and make for a great set"
The concept of the SET seems to be flickering on occasion. One night, everything will tie together perfectly, the next it's like they draw straws for the first 6-7 songs and then roll the "IIC/Encore" roulette wheel to find out which 3 encore songs to play in the 2nd set and which 2 to save for the actual encore.
The individual highlights- from 20 minute DWDs to added/altered solos in Mound & Farmhouse have been incredibly impressive, but in all honesty we're seeing very little in the way of cohesive sets of music this year. I'm curious about this other audience that exists and writes Phish loves letters for playing their 18 favorite songs in the 2nd set
This set looks like PNC II..Plus Golgi, Sleep, Caspian, Buffalo Bill, Makisupa & Zero.
I first saw Phish in the early nineties and I continued to see them regulalry through Cypress. In addition, I have listened to a great many of the shows they have played over the last two and a half years and I have seen them twice in the last nine months. With that in mind it is hard to fathom some of the comments I see posted here. Phish is clearly a much tighter band now than they were ten to twelve years ago. The all around musicianship and interplay is simply astounding, even on off nights.
The notion that songs need to be stretched out for twenty and even thirty to forty minutes to be successful is simply absurd. I was there when they stretched Runaway Jim out for 50 plus minutes in Worcester and it was amazing but one of the things that made it amazing was the fact that it was so rare.
Personally I find that Phish is doing much more in less time than they ever did in the nineties. There were plenty of times I saw them where Trey and Fish would be playing tag and Page and particularly Mike would not seem to be privy to where they were trying to go. It often felt like parts of the extended jams were simply them all trying to get on the same page with each other. Clearly that still happens occasionally but from what I am hearing it is much more of a rarity.
I appreciate the fact that we all have opinions and I understand that many of you have seen Phish far more often than I have. Nevertheless I am somewhat taken aback by the unrelenting emphasis that is always being placed on the length of time that they play a particular song. As a musician I would much rather see the emphasis being placed on the quality of the musicianship (which is unparrelelled in this genre of music).
Am I the only one who appreciates these arrangements and compositions for the genius they embody? I mean its fun when they stretch things out but longer improvisation doesn't necessarily equal better improvisation. I have to tell you that I have experienced plenty of extended jams that go nowhere, fast or slow, and as a musician I am at least as interested in the manner in which they improvise during the lyrical structure of a song. I mean its nice to get spacey every once in a while but no two versions of these songs are exactly alike - nor should they be - and who are we to expect that they will jam things out for a similar length of time every time or in the way that we think that they ought to? Seriously folks its them up there playing the music. What if they've played enough 30 to 40 minute Tweezers to know that they don't want to go their all the time? That it gets dry or unfulfilling... I'm not saying it does, but again they're making the music so don't they get a say in any of this?
I feel the same way about the comments directed at the freequency at which some songs are being played, such as Possum. Clearly they enjoy playing that song. If you don't want to hear it so be it. But I want to hear them play the songs that they enjoy playing because I know from first hand experience that music tends to sound better when those playing it are actually enjoying themselves. And that for me is the real kicker. I have watched all the recent webcasts and I got to see them up close and personal at Outside lands and what I see are four guys who are having a blast and producing an ever evolving work of art in the process.
Personally I have been lucky enough to see some really amazing shows in the course of the almost twenty years that I have been seeing and listening to this band. I agree that they do not seem to be probing and searching the way they were in the nineties but I take that with a grain of salt as something that should be expected. This is a much tighter and much more mature band. With that said I think it is amazing that they continue to find ways to make things fresh and to try new tracks with their improvisation in the way that they do. It is hard to conceive of a rock oriented band in the history of music that can hold a candle to the flame that is Phish and just once I would like to click on this website and not be greeted by inane whining about the length of time they did or did not jam out a particular song or how freequently they've played chalkdust or possum or crosseyed and painless or how Trey is forcing Tweezer into Julius or Caspian instead of letting the jam develop.
I mean really if you want to do it differently by all means get up there and give it a go yourself. Otherwise why not focus on soemthing constructive???
I agree that from my listening of this leg (from my couch, which no matter what anyone says can't really give a true review) rock and roll> meatstick> boogie from gorge, and second set from chi night one, are the best imo. Waves soundcheck is fucking ridik. Storage jam ridik as well. But these are highlights and cannot be the norm all show every show. Like every tour there are the highlights from the general quality of the tour. This tour's highlights are sick, inspired, and fresh. But the general quality of the rest is super tight, well played, and energetic. Go back to any tour and re-listen to it in entirety and tell me that every show was the fire, and that every one was completely original.....bullshit.
And then its either "playing the same shit over and over again" or "fuck these new songs suck let me hear that old shit"....cant have it all.
Its like the memories of place we have from our childhood that over time have been raised to much higher places than the reality that they were. You then go back years later and it just doesn't add up. The difference with Phish is that not only are they not the same as back then, but they have become something new and different. So what I am saying is not only is your idealistic memory of Phish not going to be reconfirmed in reality, it isn't even possible because this band is not static. Surrender to the flow, jump back on the train (or not), and if your on your on. If your not your not...
First night in Denver I want:
Possum> DWD> Tweezer> Ghost> 2001> Caspian> Theme> Carini> Bowie> Stash> C&P> TTE> Possum> Meatstick> SugarShack> Reba> Light> Bathtub Gin> Possum
I want just one set with no song over 7 minutes.
Encore: Joy> Summer of 89> Show of life
See yall there!
But seriously: Thanks Phish......Ya'll are by far the Best....
"Phish is clearly a much tighter band now than they were ten to twelve years ago. The all around musicianship and interplay is simply astounding, even on off nights."
End of story.
I'm stealing that.
I have also said this before, but it deserves to be said again...Older fans and others who have been seeing the band since the 90's tend to hold on to nostalgia and set unrealistic expectations for shows--myself included. It took away from some 2.0 experiences for me, but I have adjusted my attitude here in 3.0. Going in with no expectations or preconceived notions cleared my head to see that the band is really rocking right now. I am thoroughly enjoying their shows. They sound tight, rehearsed, and happy on stage and this is wonderful for everyone. It comes through the music. I dig the song heavy first sets, but I wish they would stretch out some jams in the second set. I still think their playing is great, but that is just my opinion and others can disagree. Just don't act like I am some jaded vet that can't enjoy a show. The enthusiasm of new fans is wonderful and I am always glad when someone 10-15 years younger than me "gets it" and is turned onto the best music out there. It makes me happy. I just hope people don't walk around sniffing each other's asses. Fans have been analyzing and criticizing sets out of love for this band for 25 years and that is what this forum has always been about. It is not about to change now, so deal with the sensitivity issues, add your two cents, and join the conversation.
Sorry so long, but I had to get that off my chest. I have been thinking about that for a while. Of course I invite feedback.
Dosque
I first saw Phish when they opened for Santana in Summer of '92 and Trey came out and rocked it with Carlos. Since then, I have seen some really excellent shows (by my standards, not all-time consensus shows). I remember in '97-'98 what became "epic" for some people like 30+ minute versions of songs, for me was boring. I saw the 10/31/98 show (and the night before) in Vegas, and remember that 3rd set absolutely killing me. It wasn't epic, it was an ambient snooze-fest (plus I have never liked Piper which I have termed "the song that goes nowhere"
What a red herring. This is a typical BS method of argument -- so typical there's a name for it: "The notion that songs need to be stretched out for twenty and even thirty to forty minutes to be successful is simply" a Straw Man.
Need? 20, 30, 40? I haven't heard folks saying that, so what's the point of pretending they are?
The "jaded vets" want jams, not durations.
But if you think we're all size queens, fine.
Carry on. ::sigh::
@GottaJiballer - We'll see.. It's way too early to tell. Let's not forget how promising the first two nights of Bethel were before a lot of the same frustrating things about 09-10 popped right back up again..
Yeah, as soon as i posted my comment the set began to get stale. Thought about commenting again last night but was hoping they would pull something out that would redeem me. They did not
We realize he may have been joking around, but either way, we do exist haha check us out!
Phish rips a show, half of the fanbase complains. Apparently there are some things in 2011 that are *exactly* the same as the 90's scene.
I'd rather see songs get a brief treatment if the band isn't feeling it (noodling around trying to find a jam for 10 minutes reming anyone of the pre-hiatus era). Not all 30 minute jams are nice ones. I did really like the DWD (21 minute) from the other night as well, both live and recorded.
What I like most about this instance of Phish is the ability to screw around with the jam type. Short/extended, standard/inventive, teases, interesting segways, etc. While I love Fall '97, I don't think I'd go into a perpetual time machine there. Some would, but not me.
There is plenty of interesting and fulfilling Phish out there to suit everyones needs, find it and rock out.
I have little to add, except that posting a "counter-review" or criticism of the sort that Phish can do no wrong, anyone who breathes one word of criticism or comparison is a "jaded vet" or a "hater" sounds to me like "STFU", a knee jerk response that's intended as a conversation stopper, and "one upsmanship" gambit.
Also, I'd give the authors of these kinds of posts more credit if most of them didn't just sign up on this site recently and make their only posts ones being instant critics of critics. Most of these users have no shows in their profiles, have contributed no reviews of shows they've attended or even forum comments. Makes me wonder, especially since the site team members posting have contributed reviews and essays on the music for years on r.m.p. and then the Phish Companion books.
When I first started seeing Phish, I didn't think I was an expert in their music after a few shows. I'm "pro noob" and am delighted new people are finding and supporting Phish's music, but I think it's arrogant to try to critique reviews of people who have seen hundreds of shows for ten plus years, say, if your own show count is in the single digits, especially if your point is to be defensive that a "meh" show was really an all time great one, or some trite thought that we shouldn't weigh and compare but "just be grateful Phish is playing again".
YMMV. Flame away.
My 0.03
"I'm hoping for the best, but prepared for this show to just be one of those ones where Phish is playing for the audience in front of them and not thinking about it in a larger context. "
I think that inadvertantly you summed it up perfectly.
Phish has always been a live band who plays for the audience in front of them. What is the larger contaxt? Or is there one at all?
Does every show have to be an epic?
The whole couch tour thing is totally overblown IMHO. It's nice and convenient to be able to do it, but not at all the intention behind a live show.
Of course I dont think that delegitmizes any criticism of the music itself, but listening at home or on "tape" only gives a portion of the total experience and that cannot and should not be discounted from any critique.
By all accounts people are having a blast at the shows while people on couch tour are sitting around in their wet Depends waiting for someone to come and change them.
I also support @pzerbo.
Or if you just think it's fundamentally improper to discuss contemporary Phish rationally, with historical perspective, and express personal preferences within the context of the different sorts of peformances Phish has made in the past (immediate, recent, and long-term), then perhaps you shouldn't spend time on a website BROUGHT TO YOU BY DOZENS OF FAN/VOLUNTEERS WHO HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT PHISH LIKE THIS FOR 10-20 YEARS AND BUILT THE SITE TO FACILITATE THIS.
Or is it actually that you think it's fine to express personal opinions about Phish, as long as they happen to be your own?
All of the extremist posts arguing against any contextural discussion about Phish, like yours, seem to boil down to: "Stop analyzing Phish. Phish is great right now."
If you want to provide reviews/analysis that demonstrates why you think Phish is great, I encourage you to do so. If you want to simultaneously argue that we shouldn't even analyize it, and that by the way your own analysis has conclusively determined that the band is great right now, I encourage you to find a forum that is intolerant to dissenting views and where groupthink (to your liking, of course) prevails.
If you don't like it, don't go... to a website dedicated to gathering facts about Phish and discussing them.
I waited up for the Live Phish download to be available, and listened to it. Thereby severely shortening my sleep time. Then I listened to it again this morning. Then I wrote my own thoughts down intending to post them.
Thankfully, I didn't compose my thoughts in the comment box and immediately hit send. My review would have made the haters seem like lovers. I was just amazed when I looked back over what I had written.
So, now I have a review I'm not happy with and a show that still doesn't sit right. I'll give the show yet another listen, and update my thoughts.
@pzerbo and @lumpblockclod said:
my own seething personal hatreds aside, this is clearly a pretty much optimal stance to take w/r/t last night's show. the band is ripping up the stage and it probably doesn't do anyone any good to scrutinize every single night looking for Long Jams and Perfect Smoothesque(?! no idea what i mean by that ?!).
phish don't try to play specific kinds of jams; they try to be true to the moment. sometimes that means the Worcester Jim. sometimes shit gets fun/dumb. it remains phish; we like the band; @mdosque has it.
I don't see much that could be termed "analysis" popping up. I see opinions and I welcome opinions. I don't understand the - what seems to me - hostility. I never tried to tell anyone to stop having their opinion or to stop posting it, although it does seem like that is what I have been told by at least one person.
Moreover, the notion that I advanced a "straw man argument" is silly as I never attemtped to disprove anyone elses assertions or offered any type of formal argument, I simply made my opinion known.
As an aside, I have an M.A. in philosophy and have finished the course work for a Ph.D in that field as well so I know a little bit about what a straw man is and what it is not and it is surely not something that we should be talking about in relation to this thread as these posts reflect people's subjective opinions as they relate to matters of aesthetic judgment and not objective facts that can be clearly demarcated and deliberated upon. As I would never attempt to disprove someone's opinion I find the mention of a straw man to be something of a bait and switch. Simply, making pejorative statements that assert that I am committing some kind of logical slight of hand is simply a way of diverting attention from what I actually said. Not only do I think ththat this is uncalled for; all it suggests to me is an intolerance for others opinions and an unwillingness to interact with them.
If you don't like my opinion that's fine, I have seen numerous opinions that do not reflect my own and that contain all sorts of faulty reasoning that could be pointe out if we were to discuss it in formal terms but this is a forum where people post their opinions and as I have been listening to and seeing Phish for more than twenty years and playing music myself for more than twenty five I felt like I should give voice to my own feelings.
In addition there is something to be said about the letter and the spirit of a reading and this is another area where my purported emphasis is being exagerated. Does it really make a difference if people are talking about twenty thirty or forty minute jams? The main point is that there has been a lot of dialogue about how Phish is not jamming long enough. Focusing on the numbers as if that was an important part of what I said is baffling!
As for the matter of analysis... I would appreciate some of that but I don't see how they didn't jam long enough or they play Possum to much is an analysis. What does any of that tell me about the quality of the musicianship? I am amused that a post that ended with an encouragement to be more constructive was lashed out at by some of you in the way that it was. It was meant to provide more diversity of opinion as I know that it is out there... Telling me that I would be better off not posting is kind of funny coming from someone who claims to be about dialogue... There is much more that could be said but there is only so much time and space... I will say this though the suggestion that "jamming is what we do here" seems a little off... I would suggest that great music is what is done here and that jamming is only one piece of that larger picture. I meant know disrespect to anyone and I really don't understand how anyone would think that I am intolerant of other's opinions. Giving voice to a lack of understanding of other people's opinions and asking for more constructive conversation is almost always and attempt to stimulate conversation, not suppress it!
Peace
ridiculously filthy
Quoting both points because I agree with both of them. FWIW, I love 3.0 and am really happy Phish are back, but sometimes I wish that jams like the Pine Knob DWD would happen more often. Like, say, every third show...?
This isn't some cry for twenty minute jams either. I often find it ridiculous to judge a song based on how many minutes the jam is, but a Ghost that was less than 4 minutes? Something was going on. Trey was trying very hard to get things going in Piper. Jumping around to boost some energy...trying that huge lick he played out of the blue...but that didn't go anywhere...it just didn't work that set. Something seemed wrong.
Also...what were they passing around about halfway through the first set that they all then put into their mouths?
Set two is a whole beast of conflicting emotions for me. C+P is a great Set opener, loved it even though this version is average. The segue between C+P and No Quarter is easily my favorite of this tour.
Other than that, I'd really like to see a video of this show to find out what happened. The first half of the set is either Paige trying valiantly to cover for Trey who is having serious guitar problems, or it is a 'Halloween' style concept with a deliberate attempt to play off of the storage jam concept by making everything sound like it is bubbling up out of that ambient jam.
Either way. The set sounds like a mess. 3/5 max. And that's just because I really (seriously) enjoyed the first set, and even more so in my modified, no songs with state names form.
8/16 was still much better than 8/27, but all smiles here from all 3 shows
as for the notion that each opinion is like a beautiful little baby brain creation, unique as a snowflake and worthy of exaltation; well thats just nonsense. each person as a human being is entitled to his/her own opinions, but that does not mean that i or anyone else am obliged to respect them. i respect your right to have them, but it simply doesn't follow that we should all equally respect the subjectivity of a response to art. i would respect heidegger's views on the being of the object of art in relation to Being in general quite a bit more than someone going to a museum and responding, "totes hetty brah." i see this a lot in the jamband community: that opinions are purely subjective and thus cannot be measured in any analytic sort of way...
anytime there is context provided in opinions, or references to how phish used to play, or how they are playing this tour, etc; we delve into the world of analytic assessment which is based on a response to actual factual artifacts. this sense of contexting is provided in nearly every review and implies an analytically generated starting ground to even be on the same page when speaking on a subject. the implied consensus or relation factual objectivity informs one's opinions in combination with the objective stimulus of the actual show reviewed. one's emotional response to a show has it's own internal logic that can be examined and discussed as to cognitive validity. i.e. "i hate the song caspian thus the whole show was bunk." oversimplification, i know, but you get the point i'm making here.
that person's response to the art had clear internal disconnection between stimulus and rational response. the devaluation of reflective thought is apparent whenever people make claims that one's opinions are subjective and thus one person cannot have greater insight than another. why not fire all the college professors, round up some bums and have them teach the students? would bail out many a school's budget problems. another hyperbolic example, but you see what i'm getting at here. a further extension of censorship is the devaluation of the legitimacy of knowledgeable responses into one giantly inflated pool of "opinions" because it stifles actual thought by immersion into a sea of information. more and more is being said with less and less actually said. dude, that's just your opinion tho bra!
sorry for the rant, just bugs the bejesus loving shit out of me when i see this kind of thing posted. and its posted in these threads more than anywhere else. aside to lonesome sparrow: would love to hear a hermeneutic description not castigated to nihilistic relativism.
The placement of Alaska within this show is disconcerting, at best, and "Languid" is actually a very apropos description. Given the following setlist... Colonel Forbin's Ascent > Fly Famous Mockingbird, Gumbo > Possum, Weigh > The Divided Sky, (????????), Bathtub Gin, Maze, Cavern > First Tube ... a setlist filled with quirky, complex, and offbeat rhythms. Phish took a good 2:30+ min to decide what song to play between Divided Sky and Bathtub Gin, and came up with a song which has absolutely nothing in common with any of those songs.
I am happy to take some responsibility for my own ranting and for maybe not spelling out my intentions and meanings as clearly as I should have or perhaps could have. Be that as it may, I still attempted to generate some dialogue as to the deeper motivations behind the frustrated reviews I routinely come across bemoaning the lack of extended jams and the repetitiveness of certain song selections. I never took anyone particular to task for their opinions. I suggested - apparently in a way that some took to be perjorative - that the length of a jam and the quality of the playing are not equivalent (an opinion that I still maintain).
I can hear the frustration in some of the responses to my thread and unsderstand that perhaps my initial post came across a little strong and I do think that it was taken out of context (with someone suggesting that I think that people who want longer jams are size queens and someone else suggesting that I am trying to silence dialogue) but the intent behind it was still to offer a differing opinion and to generate conversation. Sometimes the best way to do that is to come on strong...
I am interested in other's opinions and see no reason to suggest that my opinion is better or more informed than anyone elses I would simply like to hear something said about what is and what isn't working in a given jam rather than generalized statements about length and frequency of songs.
I think that's a big part of my issue. I have seen and followed Phish through a variety of incarnations over two decades and I play music myself regularly and I don't share some of the opinions that I keep seeing. I take for granted that many of the other folks here have been into Phish and have been seeing them for as long and as freequently as I have if not more so and with that in mind I stuck my nose in and said something because I am in fact genuinely interested in why it is that others feel the way that they do.
At least with regards to this discussion I have to pass on making judgments about who is and who is not qualified to offer an opinion and who's opinion is more legitimate because I was just looking for some meaningful dialogue. I have some flexibility in what I respond to and what I choose to ignore so I don't see the need to alienate anyone by suggesting that their opinion is not as valuable as someone elses.
As for the matter of sticking to either offering a subjective opinion or else an objective review... I inititally posted my opinion vis a vis other opinions that have been posted. For example, statements like "this song must die" referencing the freequency at which Possum has been played of late, or else statements to the effect that their has not been enough extended jamming of late are in no way objective; to say that their has not been as much extended jamming as in the past is somewhat factual but the statement that there has not been enough is in fact an opinion (and to clarify again it is opinion that I would simply like to try to understand better - as someone who has heard almost all of these songs hundreds if not thousands of times the suggestion of overplay strikes me as a little odd).
Any mention of aesthetics and judgments were made in relation to this particular conundrum and only to clarify that it is not fair to suggest that I am making a straw man arguement because there really is no argument that I can make against these kind of opinions except to say that I personally don't agree with them (which I did and I realize now that I probably should have included that kind of phrasing in the original statement since so much of this has turned into a dialogue about semantics and interpretations).
Clearly I don't agree with some of the things that I have seen posted but if I were going to try to review the commentary, as has been suggested, I would actually want to see something substantial that I could offer a reasoned response to and I'm just not seeing that. I'm seeing a lot of there's too much of this song there's not enough of that jam. I am seeing some good stuff right now about song placement in response to the last UIC show and I am content to move on and see how things continue to unfold but I am still interested in hearing about why people feel the way that they do in regards to the matter I originally posted about.
Finally, it was stated that: "the devaluation of reflective thought is apparent whenever people make claims that one's opinions are subjective and thus one person cannot have greater insight than another. why not fire all the college professors, round up some bums and have them teach the students? would bail out many a school's budget problems. another hyperbolic example, but you see what i'm getting at here."
No actually I don't see what you are getting at here. We are particpating in an online dialogue that is pretty loose, not a roundtable on art criticism @ Harvard, and as I never said anything that should suggest that some opinions are not more well informed than others I don't get the necessity of this particualr point. Frankly nothing I see posted here (including my own ramblings) are at the level of philosophical criticism - NOR SHOULD THEY BE - and if I wanted to do philosophical analysis here I would have started off in that vein. Clearly when it comes to authentic philosophical critique some are more informed and more qualified than others but that being the case one can usually rely on those qualified individuals to state the reasons that support their conclusions. That being said, as far as I'm concerned in a chat space like this its people's human right to their opinions that I want to emphasize! I don't have to bother responding to opinions and arguments that strike me as hopelessly uninformed. And if others feel that way about my posts they don't have to respond to them either!
Sorry if this doesn't satisfy but I am out of time
Certainly, if the jam from Ghost from the show in question had been stretched out longer, it would have been more successful, since as it happened, there was no jam whatsoever in the song. The second set of opening night at UIC was pretty much universally loved, all the jams were successful, the songs were not stretched out "ad infinitum", but they were expanded upon in a number of creative and unique ways. I'm happier with a show like that than with a show like Wednesday, when improvisation is bypassed in favor of goofy, good rockin' fun. I have nothing against goofy, good rockin' fun, but it's not my favorite thing about Phish performances and never was. I'm not looking for endless 30-40 minute jams, but I am looking for them to improvise and expand on the structure of the tunes often, and I think when they do loosen up the results are generally pretty awesome right now.
Reading the variety of opinions helps we realize that there are equally valid viewpoints where none is more correct than the other, even when they approach the show from diametrically opposing viewpoints.
I evaluate these shows from yet another differing view, quite possibly a minority view where setlist construction, harmony, melody & mood all play a part in how I react to a show, and are either not so easy to define, or I lack the correct vocabulary to adequately convey my thoughts on the subject.
I think @lonesome_sparrow is actually conveying what is missing from these discussions that the rating of a jam is being often being discussed in term of length. 23 min YEM, 20 Min DWD. These comments dont normally arise from the more experienced listener, but they do seem to be the most often posted "critiques".
The question then becomes, how do you quantify the quality of a Jam? Yes, I raised a question, but I cant fully answer it. I can say that I will listen to the Divided Sky from this show (2011/08/17) more than the Undermind from (2011/08/16).
I can identify my problems with Undermind ... the first 1:30 is distinctly sub-par, then from aprox 5:00 till 6:00 it is again distinctly below par (in my estimation). The jam also seems to lurch from theme to theme with no inner connectivity between the themes. Ive read it described as Awesome and Intense. Both are correct, but Beauty it does not posses.
Divided Sky on the other hand, seems to move effortlessly through each section, with a flow I didn't feel emanating from Undermind. Beautiful, absolutely. Awesome, yes, at least for me. Intense, no, not really.
So, that's my ΒΆΒΆ on the conversation so far. Thanks for giving me so much food for thought.
Cheers!
In a private message someone helped me re-evaluate something else that I said in that post where I suggested that they are a tighter band. That doesn't really say what I was trying to get at at all. I was commenting on the the virtuosity of their playing when I used the word tight speaking to the fact that their collective mastery of their individual instruments (and I also think the way that they blend them together) has improved. But aside from this sharpness of skill its actually much more true to say that they are in many ways looser now and seem to be having a great deal of fun in varrying their approach to songs, changing rhythms, playing more off the beat, altering harmonies, and just being very playful in a dexterous manner which is something as a musician and as a listener that pleases me and fascinates me because I know how hard it is to be in a space to be able to pull it off.
I guess I feel like the total product has improved and I feel like a lot of the jams I've heard lately don't have the meandering, sometimes noodling quality that would sometimes pop up during some extended jams I've experienced in the past (not that that was always the case, I'm not trying to over generalize here).
Some of this is definitely a product of maturation, perhaps trading some attention to exploration for a feeling of direction as if some areas have already been perhaps a little bit more well-traversed and thus they have a better sense of where they want to go with it (and here to I don't want to over generalize as I feel like I have heard a great deal of explorative jamming from them of late that I think is really bold and fresh Rock and Roll from the Gorge and Light from Tahoe come immediately to mind, and on a related note and though it was not necessarily novel in its structure the intensity of the jam on Julius @ Outside Lands was beyond anything I've ever felt on that song and it continued on from their into Backwards down the number line with these sharp energetic licks that were shattering and uplifting all it once - felt like my head was exploding with light)!!!
It seems to me too that they are really just starting to lock in insofar as this new incarnation is concerned and I attribute much of their willingness to repeat songs more often as well as to varry their approach to a song (loosening or tightenting up) from time to time to be indicative of both their desire to really lock in on both on a given song and also just to stay synched in together thus making sure they play the songs they feel best about. As well as to give the people in various locales some of what they think that they really want to hear because they are perhaps playing less frequently. (It was my good friend's birthday @ Outside Lands) we were there with friends who had been to Tahoe, I had watched the webcasts, our friend really wanted to hear six songs that had been played in the last week due to him not having seen Phish since 1999 and they played all of them and while this was frustrating to some degree for some folks who had seen them more recently they just killed those songs and we loved it).
Anyway, I've got to make dinner. I didn't intend to be confrontational and I'm sorry if I came across that way. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to extended jams from this particular incarnation of my favorite band. Given what I said above about the sharpness of their playing I have no reason to expect that that would be a bad thing. I do feel like a great deal of what I have heard over the last year in particular has been significantly sharper on a collective level than much of what I was hearing in the nineties and I have definitely been doing a fair amount of listening and making comparisons. There was definitely much more exploration going on during the nineties but I don't know that the music was "better". Jams are great but I really love the songs themselves and their various arrangements and the weird harmonies and parts that they have and I feel like that is all significantly more cohesive, lively, and above all sharp and big in its sound quality. That said, Iwon't be complaining if they decide to take another fifty minute tour through Runaway Jim or Tweezer - I would actually really like to hear them stretch out Steam as I feel like that has all sorts of potential for new directions and sounds - or anything else for that matter, I remember a particularly interesting and long Jam on Fee from the Winter Run in 99, I digress....
Anyway, I meant no disrespect so sorry to get off on the wrong foot.
Be Well
Sparrow
Good thing I got 97 Mcnichols with 12 songs and a damn near 15 minute average which fucked me up next......
This band just doesn't do it like they used too.....now all I get is all kinds in three nights...wtf...an "element" set of the new shit, a 20 min dwd and 20 min yem bookshelf, and then a crosseyed rage everything into each other fest......yea 3.0 sucks.....
I like exploratory jams. I've been around Phish since 1992, and I have often praised their long crazy jams. BUT length or number of songs does not mean quality...in any context. It just doesn't...whether or not you prefer a 25 minutes 2001 from 1998 that doesn't accomplish very much other than a beat to move to or a 6 minute Runaway Jim from 1992 that shreds your face or 2 and half minute version of Schumann's 'Traumerei.". It just doesn't matter. No sarcasm...just truth. Good music isn't determined by the length the improvisation or composition.