I'd like to say that I've really enjoyed reading the posts by @Lonesome_sparrow, @nichobert, @crustynoob & @AlbanyYEM. You have all given me food for though, whether I agree with every word you've said, or not. Each of you is well spoken and obviously sees the show from a slightly different perspective.

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 ¢¢ on the conversation so far. Thanks for giving me so much food for thought.

Cheers!