R1/W01: 08-07-1993 Darien Lake Performing Arts Center, Darien Center, NY

[jedifunk]

listening to 8-13 right now!  i already know that the mikes is the HEAT, and the bathtub->yamar is top shelf.. but the opening to the show is great.  lengthwise->llama, makisupa>foam!  excellent!

[sls.stormyrider]

Been listening to that one last night on the way home and this AM on the way in.
Fluffhead!

[fauxpaxfauxreal]

THREAD JACK SUCCESSFUL!!!!!

:evil:

[Gumbo72203]

well, im going to put myself in the line of fire and say that i was really dissapointed when i bought the Tinley Park Live Phish release.  That 2nd set is just wayyy too atonal for me, i really hate when Phish does that stuff that doesnt make any sense.  Only the Dead could come close to making that kind of thing enjoyable.  Now, i do like it when Trey mixes up some atonal, out-of-key stuff in Run Like an Antelope sometimes and in other songs, but this 2nd set is just way too much for me.  I really dont like it at all, in fact, its out of its case/folder sitting in with the pile of cds of shows that i burned that i dont like/listen to.  The first set is alright, Divided Sky, and Esther is always a goodie, but in general, i think its a weak show.

but the thing with August 93, and 93 in generally really, is the crazy song jumps and setlists.  To me it seems they were looking to the Dead as inspiration this time, because to me, this is the only time period where there was a distinct difference between first and second sets, in terms of the setlist and the way the show went.  93 is really the only time that 2nd sets were almost always one big long segue, the way the Dead did it, with the first set being the time for individual songs and a couple segues here and there to heat things up and get ready for the 2nd set.  anybody else agree?

[August]

To me it seems they were looking to the Dead as inspiration this time, because to me, this is the only time period where there was a distinct difference between first and second sets, in terms of the setlist and the way the show went. 

what about 94?
especially fall 94.
a

[jedifunk]

93 is really the only time that 2nd sets were almost always one big long segue, the way the Dead did it, with the first set being the time for individual songs and a couple segues here and there to heat things up and get ready for the 2nd set.  anybody else agree?

have you listened to any of fall 97?  over half the 2nd sets from that tour are 5-7 songs long and are all linked into one via -> or >, more so that anything from 93... alot of 93 segues are entirely unsmooth and intuitive, whereas a good chunk of later year segues are a little bit more random and flow with the music.  one of the reason i dont enjoy the older stuff as much is that a lot of the segues are really forced, and you can tell.

[sls.stormyrider]

^
Definitely agree with aug and jedi. To me, 93 was about tight, well played high energy sets and doing fun stuff. I think sometimes they did it just because they could, and it would be a blast. The segue fests are fun, but often are a bit contrived.
They were more serious about the music later on, with mind blowing jams and segues that seemed more natural. IMO 97 is more like the Dead than 93.
I like listening to both, but as someone else said, they are almost (not quite) like different bands.

[cactusfan]

listening to 8-13 right now!  i already know that the mikes is the HEAT, and the bathtub->yamar is top shelf.. but the opening to the show is great.  lengthwise->llama, makisupa>foam!  excellent!

well heck. if the funk loving jedi says 8.13.93 is that good, i suppose i'd better check it out.

[Hicks]

See for me since 93 was when they first began playing real segues, it's interesting to hear them learn this technique on stage as they're performing, it's totally fresh and new, and by 97 it was almost expected of them and that totally changes the dynamic of it, for me.

Having said that, I love a 97 segue fest as much as the next guy, just not in the same way. 

[jedifunk]

ikki- i see  your point, and i'll have to try that point of view on my next listen of a 93 show... cuz instead of hearing it as being "forced" i could choose to hear it as "learning how"... and thats a great way to listen!

[Hicks]

I would agree with your assesment of it sounding "unsmooth" Jedi, or I might be more charitable and call it "raw", but I personally really like that raw or unsmooth quality, it just sounds so "real" to me, if that makes any sense.

[jedifunk]

"real" works for me, as long as you dont say that its "more real" than the more "mature" "refined" segues in the later years...

[birdman]

   Its all about viewing the show in its phishtorical context. Juxtaposing  it with everything that came after takes away from its importance.  But compare this show to what came before...the segues and raritites really make this show stand out from those in the past..thats what makes the show important.
   While everyones opinions are valid, we should try to remember and place ourselves in the era during which the shows are played when making our observations. Thats not to say we shouldnt compare and contrast new/old, but it makes it a more "interesting" listen when listened to with "time machine" ears...does that even make sense?

This goes along with my when the fish song is "Bike", it's probably a killer show...similarly...when the fish song is "purple rain"...it's probably a killer show.

The Bomb Factory, 12-30-93, 2-20-93 what do all three of these CLASSIC shows have in common?  Besides being top 10 (arguably so) classic phish shows?

Purple Rain, that's what

They debuted Purple Rain on 2-20-93 :? Damn, I always thought it was 7-16-93 for some reason. :lol:


This shows been in my collection for sooo long that I feel my opinion would be somewhat biased. With that said, I agree 110% with birdman's opinion of this show! :-D

Lot knows :-D

[jedifunk]

another great way to listen/view a show is in the context of being there...

i know there were plenty of shows i attended where i had an amazing time, and left the venue beeming from what i consider "a sick show"... and some of those just dont hold up on tape for me... new orleans 99 is like that... great show while it was happening, pretty standard in retrospect.

alot has to do with what your in the mood for... i think in person, setlist has a lot more to do with my enjoyment of a show than on tape...  hearing something that i'm extremely pumped to hear at that moment, just doesnt carry any weight for me years later on tape... i look at the setlist and listen to the show and just cant recapture those feelings...

of course there are always exceptions (12/13/97).

[Hicks]

   Its all about viewing the show in its phishtorical context. Juxtaposing  it with everything that came after takes away from its importance.  But compare this show to what came before...the segues and raritites really make this show stand out from those in the past..thats what makes the show important.
    While everyones opinions are valid, we should try to remember and place ourselves in the era during which the shows are played when making our observations. Thats not to say we shouldnt compare and contrast new/old, but it makes it a more "interesting" listen when listened to with "time machine" ears...does that even make sense?

I'm totally with you, and in fact I would argue that juxtaposing a show like this with everything that came after it makes it even more important.  There would have been no Bomb Factory, 20-30 minute Mike's and Tweezers, etc. etc. without shows like these, and listening with that frame of references really makes me appreciate shows from 93.

Btw, check out albanks comments on the torrent, at least someone out there agrees with me!  :wink:

http://bt.etree.org/details.php?id=25232

Notice how he also names 8/2 as a runner up, how cool is that?