Pretty interesting learning the specs of this thing. Sweet interview and it's great .net got to talk with the inventors of this lighting stuff!

The questions I would have asked is:

The second set pattern has stayed the same all year, but could it be a different configuration?
Could the panels split apart during the sets as the band is doing different things on stage, like the panels could "improv" through patterns and arrangements as the music is playing, or are they set and fixed the way they are for good?

That's what I first envisioned with these panels, that they didn't have to be set a certain way every show. The fact that they are are solid for 1st set and split up 2nd set also conforms the sets to what they seem to be: 1st set is standard, programmatic, drab, songy, non-jammy; 2nd set is a free for all, jammy, not songy, non-standard, outside the program. I really really hate this dichotomy of 1st set/2nd set "is this way." To me (and I know y'all are gonna say "but that's how IT is, bro...") having even the lighting be "standardized improvisation" is playing into the expectations that we have all grown accustomed to and to me, that's not what Phish is all about.

If the panels could evolve during the first set, or be split up during the first set and not the second, or change into something unexpected during the second set, it would be way more in line with the unpredictability of Phish, what, to me, defines them as a band and what they built their fan base and namesake on: being able to wipe the slate clean every show and astound you with that "wtF??!" time and time again. I feel like the band is completely losing that aspect of themselves and we have been talking about and around this fact for the last few years here on .net. I really like these panels, but the fact that you already know what they are gonna look like each show, each tour, adds that "I know what is gonna happen" vibe to the whole show. Surprise me Phish!! You're so good at it so keep doing it!!!