Listening to 6-18-94

[Ri©h]

Gumbo, I'm only going to say this once so please pay attention and read for comprehension.

Nothing, and I mean NOTHING that Phish performed post-hiatus, was, nor will ever be, better than pre-hiatus. 

Remember that. Say it to yourself 1000x daily and then another 1000 right before you go to bed.  I want you to dream about this.  Ingrain it in your memory.  Know it, learn it, live it.

That is all.

A bunch of nonsense.

Save it for the jury.  

Back to the topic at hand. 06/18/1994. First time I heard this show I was eager to listen to it over and over.  I didn't get the tape of this show until almost a year after it happened.  Mainly because I had discovered something called the internet and a place called rec.music.phish.  I no longer felt the need to trade out of the back of Relix because this new internet thing meant getting shows faster.

Before 6/18/94 I had seen the band just a month prior in So. California on three nights.  Those shows were the heat and I wanted to re-capture that feeling. This show delivered.  I think I traded for this show and the OJ show and a couple of others.  6/17 and 6/18 were immediate favorites.  The Bowie is an obvious stand out but I love the "spam" YEM the most.  Really too many favorites to list.  This show captures Phish before the explosion. But we knew it was going to happen anyhow.

[blatboom]

Have you listened to the Tinley Antelope again?  (with your ears open this time??  :wink: :wink:)

Listened up through Sparks, halfway into Walk Away, on my way to my g/f's house.  Meh, at least for that part of Antelope.  I mean, if thats what you like, then of course its perfect.  I just prefer my Grateful Dead jamming from the Dead themselves  :wink:   haha.  Thats exactly the kind of jamming I don't like from them.  From time to time it works for me...  but no.  The thing I liked about Phish so much was that they grooved in a time signature and would do TONAL, harmonically correct jamming, like Ghost or something. 

so yeah, we'll see what the rest of the Antelope has to offer  :-D

pffff.  If you can't get with the first 10 minutes of that Antelope don't bother  :wink:

And I hope you weren't directing those n00b comments at me.  Because I have nothing but respect for your musical opinions regarding Phish, no matter how whacked I think they may be.

[rowjimmy]

I just prefer '95 over '94 in terms of the pre-Type II era.  Its all got great playing.  I'm never knocking '94. 

I have two issues with what you've written here. First, You are a bit inconsistent:

I mean granted, i don't really like '94 Phish much anyways,

Second: You don't know what Type II Jamming is.

From http://www.phish.net/faq/jamming.html:

Type I and Type II: John Flynn raised (date?) the distinction between two "types" of jamming. Type I jamming involves variations on a song's written notes and tempo; Type II jamming involves additional variations on structures and keys. Or, as he put it:

    I think Phish jamming falls into two types of jamming:
        1)  Jamming that is based around a fixed chord progression
        2)  Jamming that improvises chord progressions, rhythms,
             and the whole structure of the music.

Pornofunk / Type III: __ suggested (date) adding to the typology Type III jamming to categorize the funkified sound (a.k.a "porno-funk") that evolved throughout 1997, and particularly on the summer and fall US tours, especially in Also Sprach, Cities, Ghost, Gumbo, and Wolfman's Brother. Some feel that this is not a "type" of jamming, but something closer to a genre, and that Types I and II jamming could occur within various contexts, of which Phish adopts many (rock, jazz, funk, reggae, folk, bluegrass, et al.)

[Ri©h]

School is now in session.   :-D

[Gumbo72203]

in all honesty, this is probably the show I would choose to give to someone who had never listened to Phish.  The first set, especially, shows what they can do with explosive playing of standard Type I songs.  Plus they play Mango Song.

[rowjimmy]

in all honesty, this is probably the show I would choose to give to someone who had never listened to Phish.  The first set, especially, shows what they can do with explosive playing of standard Type I songs.  Plus they play Mango Song.

OK. If you'll say that now... why weren't you honest with us before?

haha...  lol thats funny.

anyway, the 6/18/94 PHISH show always had this mystique within the group of kids who listened to Phish at my high school; when I was first finally really actually starting to really start actually listening to Phish, this was the show they always talked about as being like, THE phish show. 

honestly, yeah its good, but nothing really gets me that much from it.  I mean granted, i don't really like '94 Phish much anyways, but even with its excellent playing, its definitely not a desert island show, for me. 

i can only imagine what it must have been like for Trey, though, during that Divided Sky......

Get yer story straight, bub!

[Poster Nutbag]

Quote from: blatboom on August 14, 2008, 06:56:38 am
Quote from: Gumbo72203 on August 14, 2008, 06:48:34 am
Quote from: blatboom on August 12, 2008, 08:16:40 pm
since this thread is already in Type II territory...

I'd like to know:  a) if in fact the 7/22/03 D.Sky is indeed flawless, and b) what the best PH D. Sky is.  (the only one I think I saw was 3/1/03 and it hurts my ears)



Yes, it actually is.  Thats what makes it so crazy.  It REALLY IS flubless.  I've listened to it so many times, scrutinizing every little part. 


I'm going to check it tonight.  If it ain't perfect I'm gonna come looking for you. 



*sigh*

it sounded exactly like I thought it would.  first of all, Trey's PH tone is like nails on a chalkboard on Skys especially.  There may not have been any flubs in the train-wreck sense, but there's plenty of spots in the first 10 minutes where Trey plays the wrong notes.  I'm not a musician so I can't say what they are, but my ears know what they should sound like.  There's no way I would have made it through that whole thing if I didn't really want to.

I understand how you may prefer a certain style to your jams that is specific to your tastes.  But on a technical song like Divided Sky, why not go with one from the early to mid-nineties?  They sound so much better (IMO).

Well i don't know if i would call any live phish jams flawless or not, but i can tell you that Trey intends to hit some of those notes in an off pitch. Trey plays in a few different scales some of which include half steps between the whole notes. for example: chromatic scale

[Gumbo72203]

I just prefer '95 over '94 in terms of the pre-Type II era.  Its all got great playing.  I'm never knocking '94. 

I have two issues with what you've written here. First, You are a bit inconsistent:

I mean granted, i don't really like '94 Phish much anyways,

Second: You don't know what Type II Jamming is.

From http://www.phish.net/faq/jamming.html:

Type I and Type II: John Flynn raised (date?) the distinction between two "types" of jamming. Type I jamming involves variations on a song's written notes and tempo; Type II jamming involves additional variations on structures and keys. Or, as he put it:

    I think Phish jamming falls into two types of jamming:
        1)  Jamming that is based around a fixed chord progression
        2)  Jamming that improvises chord progressions, rhythms,
             and the whole structure of the music.

Pornofunk / Type III: __ suggested (date) adding to the typology Type III jamming to categorize the funkified sound (a.k.a "porno-funk") that evolved throughout 1997, and particularly on the summer and fall US tours, especially in Also Sprach, Cities, Ghost, Gumbo, and Wolfman's Brother. Some feel that this is not a "type" of jamming, but something closer to a genre, and that Types I and II jamming could occur within various contexts, of which Phish adopts many (rock, jazz, funk, reggae, folk, bluegrass, et al.)

I never knocked '94.  Its great.  Thats just not the Phish that I like so much in that if given a choice, I'd spin 12/11/99 Set II before I'd pick something from '94 to listen to.  

And I know what Type II jamming is......  I basically was referring to them never really getting GOOD at it, imo, until around '97.  Before then, the only Type II jamming songs they had were Tweezer and.....  Antelope and Bowie, I guess you could possibly consider Type II just because they'd get so weird with it.  Kinda weird now that I think about it:  Bowie and Antelope turned INTO Type I jams in the late 90's, losing the schizoid, Grateful Dead quality of going anywhere, anytime aspect, like the Tinley Park Antelope.

In terms of identifying the distinction between the two, I'd consider Slave and Hood to be the prime examples of Type I jamming, with Tweezer, Ghost, and Piper being prime Type II examples, because they don't have a chord progression to follow when they jam.  

And I hope you weren't directing those n00b comments at me.  Because I have nothing but respect for your musical opinions regarding Phish, no matter how whacked I think they may be.

nope, definitely NOT at you

[redrum]

this thread gets better (or is it worse?) everyday.

[Gumbo72203]

in all honesty, this is probably the show I would choose to give to someone who had never listened to Phish.  The first set, especially, shows what they can do with explosive playing of standard Type I songs.  Plus they play Mango Song.

OK. If you'll say that now... why weren't you honest with us before?

haha...  lol thats funny.

anyway, the 6/18/94 PHISH show always had this mystique within the group of kids who listened to Phish at my high school; when I was first finally really actually starting to really start actually listening to Phish, this was the show they always talked about as being like, THE phish show. 

honestly, yeah its good, but nothing really gets me that much from it.  I mean granted, i don't really like '94 Phish much anyways, but even with its excellent playing, its definitely not a desert island show, for me. 

i can only imagine what it must have been like for Trey, though, during that Divided Sky......

Get yer story straight, bub!

Lol...  I don't know how to explain this any easier.  Okay.  1994:  not my personal choice.  I don't really care for their Type II jamming.  However, I do not deny that the era was a great era, full of great inventive playing.  Its great for what it is.  I just don't really like it.  If I'm going to listen to '94, its because I want to listen to their song playing and Type I jamming: Hood, Slave, YEM.    

Is objectively identifying something as being good but not personally liking it really that strange?  

[sls.stormyrider]

I just prefer '95 over '94 in terms of the pre-Type II era.  Its all got great playing.  I'm never knocking '94. 

I have two issues with what you've written here. First, You are a bit inconsistent:

I mean granted, i don't really like '94 Phish much anyways,

Second: You don't know what Type II Jamming is.

From http://www.phish.net/faq/jamming.html:

Type I and Type II: John Flynn raised (date?) the distinction between two "types" of jamming. Type I jamming involves variations on a song's written notes and tempo; Type II jamming involves additional variations on structures and keys. Or, as he put it:

    I think Phish jamming falls into two types of jamming:
        1)  Jamming that is based around a fixed chord progression
        2)  Jamming that improvises chord progressions, rhythms,
             and the whole structure of the music.

Pornofunk / Type III: __ suggested (date) adding to the typology Type III jamming to categorize the funkified sound (a.k.a "porno-funk") that evolved throughout 1997, and particularly on the summer and fall US tours, especially in Also Sprach, Cities, Ghost, Gumbo, and Wolfman's Brother. Some feel that this is not a "type" of jamming, but something closer to a genre, and that Types I and II jamming could occur within various contexts, of which Phish adopts many (rock, jazz, funk, reggae, folk, bluegrass, et al.)

I never knocked '94.  Its great.  Thats just not the Phish that I like so much in that if given a choice, I'd spin 12/11/99 Set II before I'd pick something from '94 to listen to.  

And I know what Type II jamming is......  I basically was referring to them never really getting GOOD at it, imo, until around '97.  Before then, the only Type II jamming songs they had were Tweezer and.....  Antelope and Bowie, I guess you could possibly consider Type II just because they'd get so weird with it.  Kinda weird now that I think about it:  Bowie and Antelope turned INTO Type I jams in the late 90's, losing the schizoid, Grateful Dead quality of going anywhere, anytime aspect, like the Tinley Park Antelope.

In terms of identifying the distinction between the two, I'd consider Slave and Hood to be the prime examples of Type I jamming, with Tweezer, Ghost, and Piper being prime Type II examples, because they don't have a chord progression to follow when they jam.  

And I hope you weren't directing those n00b comments at me.  Because I have nothing but respect for your musical opinions regarding Phish, no matter how whacked I think they may be.

nope, definitely NOT at you

not good at type 2 in 94/95? Even if you just limit it to the tunes you mentioned - Tweezer, Antelope, and Bowie ( you missed Mikes, YEM, and an epic Stash) there are too many great type 2 jams in 94/95 to list. The later years were funkier and spacier, and if you like that better that's fine. But to say that they weren't good at type 2 jamming in 94/5 is a bit of a stretch. and inaccurate.

[blatboom]

in all honesty, this is probably the show I would choose to give to someone who had never listened to Phish.  The first set, especially, shows what they can do with explosive playing of standard Type I songs.  Plus they play Mango Song.

OK. If you'll say that now... why weren't you honest with us before?

haha...  lol thats funny.

anyway, the 6/18/94 PHISH show always had this mystique within the group of kids who listened to Phish at my high school; when I was first finally really actually starting to really start actually listening to Phish, this was the show they always talked about as being like, THE phish show. 

honestly, yeah its good, but nothing really gets me that much from it.  I mean granted, i don't really like '94 Phish much anyways, but even with its excellent playing, its definitely not a desert island show, for me. 

i can only imagine what it must have been like for Trey, though, during that Divided Sky......

Get yer story straight, bub!

Lol...  I don't know how to explain this any easier.  Okay.  1994:  not my personal choice.  I don't really care for their Type II jamming.  However, I do not deny that the era was a great era, full of great inventive playing.  Its great for what it is.  I just don't really like it.  If I'm going to listen to '94, its because I want to listen to their song playing and Type I jamming: Hood, Slave, YEM.   

Is objectively identifying something as being good but not personally liking it really that strange? 

dude, if you read my post, I said I understand how you may prefer one style of jamming over another.

But that 7/22/03 Divided Sky is empirically awful compared to any 94 version.  That's all I'm saying.

[Ri©h]

Gumbo...  stop now while you still have a chance to climb out.

[Gumbo72203]

not good at type 2 in 94/95? Even if you just limit it to the tunes you mentioned - Tweezer, Antelope, and Bowie ( you missed Mikes, YEM, and an epic Stash) there are too many great type 2 jams in 94/95 to list. The later years were funkier and spacier, and if you like that better that's fine. But to say that they weren't good at type 2 jamming in 94/5 is a bit of a stretch. and inaccurate.

Ehh...  yeah okay I can see what you mean.  I just had always attributed Type II jamming to be playing tonally and harmonically consistent...  to be playing in key, and not going all over the place all the time like 72/73 Dead.  So yeah, you're right, then...  in that era those things COULD all become Type II vehicles.  

Mikes and YEM are definitely Type I, though.  The YEM jam is just vamping over whatever that chord progression is, and the Mike's jam is that F#minor groove.  

[Gumbo72203]

dude, if you read my post, I said I understand how you may prefer one style of jamming over another.

But that 7/22/03 Divided Sky is empirically awful compared to any 94 version.  That's all I'm saying.

yeah word.  I guess somehow you got confused thinking that I thought that the 7/22/03 Divided Sky was the best version.  Definitely not.  I think its good...and flubless for PH, but best ever?  Definitely not.