Permalink for Comment #1378019683 by waxbanks

, comment by waxbanks
waxbanks I guess I'm late for the fun again.

'Vultures' is one of my favourite Phish songs bar none; has been since first listen, as part of that insane batch of new tunes in Summer 97. 'Beautiful and complex and enervating' is just right. At times I've wondered how much of that collection of songs was written specifically to challenge the band. Over and over throughout their career you see them taking up a strange self-imposed challenge or constraint -- Remain in Light, the Blob, the Baker's Dozen -- and being forced to work like dogs for a while, really put in the hours to hear themselves, with their communication and connection deepening as a result. Their time in the practice room is the most important time they spend together, right? Or it used to be. (Anyone who hasn't heard Trey's Charlie Rose interview where he talks about peak moments in the band, go find it on Youtube. Sidebar: Fuck Charlie Rose though.)

Anyway, so I might shift the *emphasis* of @bertoletdown's thoughtful review a few degrees toward the second-set ('third quarter') improv -- the long 'tangent' is this review's real focus, so people feel it most strongly, no biggie -- but I'm as disappointed as Chris is in the 'mundane' execution, more bummed than worried but disappointed all the same.

How would we know Phish had become a nostalgia act? No more challenging themselves. Right now, Phish isn't much of a challenge. Certainly not the intellectual/creative challenge they've long embraced. They're *not* a nostalgia act, but it's important to be clear that that's the danger.

The Baker's Dozen is the most ambitious thing they've done in ages, and it brought the best out of them in terms of improvisation. The work focused and drove their curiosity. Remember Trey's early-2015 woodshedding, the *immediate* effect it had on the band for Summer 2015 tour? Their work ethic and exploratory creativity are tightly bound up, Trey's most of all I think, and Phish-as-summer-vacation doesn't place enough demands on them to pull them into new places.

All of which is to say that if you want Phish to play compelling improvisations, then you should be howling (or cheering, or petitioning, or just hoping) for them to double down on the 'mundane' aspects of their musical craft, to hold on to at least some (more) of the precision and focused experimentation that've long been central to their shared identity.

Having said that, I do worry that a trimmed-down songlist would lead to less interesting second sets, so if they're gonna trim the list, I'd want them also to refocus it, precisely to keep fewer of their early-second-set staples. I'd happily never hear an extended DWD again if it meant they took Mango Song or Maze or 2001 or Character Zero or (insert favourite song here) out to the 'Type II' place sometimes, but that almost certainly means a Summer 97-style culling. I'm all for it.

I liked the show, though -- I skipped the first set (ugh I'm old) and so my first listen to the Gin > Sexy and that groovy 2001 plastered huge smiles on my face. Vultures was a mess, You Sexy Thing isn't a good fit for them. They're improvising superbly at times but need variety to keep themselves fully engaged. I'm glad they're playing music; it brings me joy not least because it brings them joy. Probably they'd benefit from more rigor. I think it'd (paradoxically) loosen them up. But: whatever keeps them together and at peace, I want that too.


Phish.net

Phish.net is a non-commercial project run by Phish fans and for Phish fans under the auspices of the all-volunteer, non-profit Mockingbird Foundation.

This project serves to compile, preserve, and protect encyclopedic information about Phish and their music.

Credits | Terms Of Use | Legal | DMCA

© 1990-2024  The Mockingbird Foundation, Inc. | Hosted by Linode