Coventry was not terrible - it was my only show of 2.0, as I had pretty much done the tour thing full time from 96-2000 and had burnt out on Phish in general and didn't have much interest in music that had been ovrwhelmed by a scene. Driving into Coventry and seeing people - young scrawny "tour rats" begging for coke and pharmies - was ominous. Yeah, there'd been hard stuff on tour before 2.0 - and it was what helped destroy the scene and alienated people like me. But not to this extent.

But I enjoyed the performances, in the context that it was the end. I thought some of the improv was spectacular, and the flubs were understandable. But I'd already let go of Phish in October 2000. In many ways, when they came back in 09, it was - to me - a continuation, styllistically and aesthetically - of where they left off in 2000 - developing song-based jamming, varied setlists etc.

No I don't claim there were no good shows in 2.0 - in fact there were, and some incredibly good songwriting (I'd even call Round Room their most fully realized studio record, and Victor Disc a legend). But it set in motion a pattern in which shows are now judged - even in 3.0 by jam lengths, not by quality. A good show to a lot of the newer Phish blogs and websites is average but with a 20 min. DWD/Light/ etc. So Phish are not recieving feedback about how to play all-around good shows, and when they do, the newish school kids complain (i.e. Outside Lands)..