So I said:

Some opinion is unavoidable, sure, and I do wanna know which parts of the show you like and dislike. But I also would like a little more meat about what the show sounded like. Maybe I'm old school. I used to read recaps in the days when we traded tapes. And back then you relied on the reviews to decide which tapes you wanted to seek out. A review that just gave you the writer's opinion of how the show shoulda gone wasn't much help in finding the shows you wanted. All it could show you was how that particular guy was underwhelmed.

And then
@pyite said:

That's ancient history. You can listen to the music with your own ears with negligible effort within an hour of the show. Comparing now with an effort that hinged upon the concept of describing something people not there wouldn't hear for some time is unfair. Some might even say that describing the show in that manner is trite given today's technology.

Ok, so I'm a dinosaur. But ya know how the first record you ever heard from your favorite band is your favorite record, even if it's not their best one? That's kinda how I feel about the old-school recaps I describe. I know they may be anachronistic, but to me that is what a Phish review should look like. That's what I'm used to.

@pzerbo:
But I think you made a good point about the site showcasing different kinds of reviews. And how we should focus on the music and not the style of the writer. But the original post here had a lot of style to focus on.

As far as the music goes, I still have to stick by my opinion from yesterday. Not the best show ever. It would have been cool to see that segue back into Tweezer in person, and I still think that was a great Caspian. But I already deleted the show. Not that memorable overall.