And This is why I love jazz: What Phish Sounds like to people who don't like Phish

[N_Singh]

It always boggles my mind that the greatest improvised music ever created struggles to find an audience while people eat this crap up like its Christmas. There is nothing remotely progressive in jam bands.

http://livemusicblog.com/2010/08/02/...nt-like-phish/

[ThomasKDye]

[JKL2000]

It always boggles my mind that the greatest improvised music ever created struggles to find an audience while people eat this crap up like its Christmas. There is nothing remotely progressive in jam bands.

http://livemusicblog.com/2010/08/02/...nt-like-phish/

Do you include The Grateful Dead in that blanket statement?

[Scrotum Scissor]

Yes, the initial video WAS kinda funny.

Yet it doesn't make me enjoy The Grateful Dead or QMS - rock groups - any less than I do Ornette, Dolphy or Ayler - jazz artists. Phish? Some of their stuff I like - a lot of it I really don't. Because they're Phish - NOT because they're a "lousy jam band".

[Obscured]

And this is why I love Phish!! - Heavy Zep riffs, early Gabriel-esque lyrics, jamming, jamming, jamming.

[Yves]

Some of us like jam bands and Jazz! Imagine that!

[GuitarGeek]

Yes, the initial video WAS kinda funny.

Yet it doesn't make me enjoy The Grateful Dead or QMS - rock groups - any less than I do Ornette, Dolphy or Ayler - jazz artists. Phish? Some of their stuff I like - a lot of it I really don't. Because they're Phish - NOT because they're a "lousy jam band".

I think there really has to be a distinction made between groups like the Dead, Quicksilver, the Allmans, etc and the latter day "jam bands" like Phish. To be honest, most of the second generation bands I never really heard, I heard bits and pieces of things on college radio shows which didn't impress me. I've heard a few things from Phish and while I was initially impressed with them, I kinda lost interest quickly. They're instrumental compositions like Divided Sky were pretty good, but their actual songs weren't (with their lyrics in particulary being very weak), and they didn't really do anything interesting with their jams, either, from the recordings I heard.

By contrast, the Dead and the Allmans both had great songs that worked as actual songs, and I think their jams and improvisations actually went places that made them worth listening. I never heard any of the later jam bands do anything even close to what the Dead would do during Dark Star or The Other One (but then, as I said, I've only heard bits and pieces of some of those groups).

The stuff I've heard from bands like Phish, it sounds like they went to see the Grateful Dead sometime in the early or mid 80's (ie during the band's nadir), and said "Hey, we could do that!". In the case of Phish, at least, it also sounds like they heard a couple of Frank Zappa's less interesting records and said "Hey, we can write lyrics, like that, too".

But the reason Phish are as big as they are, really is the same reason the Dead were as big as they were, that being that they give people who didn't get the memo about the 60's ending an opportunity to party like it's 1969. After awhile, even with the Dead, it stopped being about the music so much as the party. That's why the Dead were able to get away with giving such mediocre performances during the early/mid 80's and mid 90's (the two periods where Jerry was really frelled up): because people were there more for the "non-conformist time warp party" aspect of it, rather than hearing the band do what they used to do so well.

[PeterG]

To me Phish sounds like 2 groups on one stage playing 2 different songs at the same time.

[Cats On Glue]

uggh modern day jam bands. i got no use for them.

[Trane]

I think there really has to be a distinction made between groups like the Dead, Quicksilver, the Allmans, etc and the latter day "jam bands" like Phish. To be honest, most of the second generation bands I never really heard, I heard bits and pieces of things on college radio shows which didn't impress me. I've heard a few things from Phish and while I was initially impressed with them, I kinda lost interest quickly. They're instrumental compositions like Divided Sky were pretty good, but their actual songs weren't (with their lyrics in particulary being very weak), and they didn't really do anything interesting with their jams, either, from the recordings I heard..

if I've heard something I like of Phish, It's mostly the live stuff... to be honest I'm not impressed by the few studio albums I borrowed from the library .. It's when they do extended instrumental passafes that I dig them most.... IF the groove fits my mood, of course

I've heard bit of Umphrey Mcghee, but I'm even less impressed...

By contrast, the Dead and the Allmans both had great songs that worked as actual songs, and I think their jams and improvisations actually went places that made them worth listening. I never heard any of the later jam bands do anything even close to what the Dead would do during Dark Star or The Other One (but then, as I said, I've only heard bits and pieces of some of those groups).

The stuff I've heard from bands like Phish, it sounds like they went to see the Grateful Dead sometime in the early or mid 80's (ie during the band's nadir), and said "Hey, we could do that!". In the case of Phish, at least, it also sounds like they heard a couple of Frank Zappa's less interesting records and said "Hey, we can write lyrics, like that, too".

But the reason Phish are as big as they are, really is the same reason the Dead were as big as they were, that being that they give people who didn't get the memo about the 60's ending an opportunity to party like it's 1969. After awhile, even with the Dead, it stopped being about the music so much as the party. That's why the Dead were able to get away with giving such mediocre performances during the early/mid 80's and mid 90's (the two periods where Jerry was really frelled up): because people were there more for the "non-conformist time warp party" aspect of it, rather than hearing the band do what they used to do so well.

You're a bit harsh methinks, because in that case, one could say that about 96% of rock and pop in the 90's and 00's.

[N_Singh]

I think there really has to be a distinction made between groups like the Dead, Quicksilver, the Allmans, etc and the latter day "jam bands" like Phish. To be honest, most of the second generation bands I never really heard, I heard bits and pieces of things on college radio shows which didn't impress me. I've heard a few things from Phish and while I was initially impressed with them, I kinda lost interest quickly. They're instrumental compositions like Divided Sky were pretty good, but their actual songs weren't (with their lyrics in particulary being very weak), and they didn't really do anything interesting with their jams, either, from the recordings I heard.

By contrast, the Dead and the Allmans both had great songs that worked as actual songs, and I think their jams and improvisations actually went places that made them worth listening. I never heard any of the later jam bands do anything even close to what the Dead would do during Dark Star or The Other One (but then, as I said, I've only heard bits and pieces of some of those groups).

The stuff I've heard from bands like Phish, it sounds like they went to see the Grateful Dead sometime in the early or mid 80's (ie during the band's nadir), and said "Hey, we could do that!". In the case of Phish, at least, it also sounds like they heard a couple of Frank Zappa's less interesting records and said "Hey, we can write lyrics, like that, too".

But the reason Phish are as big as they are, really is the same reason the Dead were as big as they were, that being that they give people who didn't get the memo about the 60's ending an opportunity to party like it's 1969. After awhile, even with the Dead, it stopped being about the music so much as the party. That's why the Dead were able to get away with giving such mediocre performances during the early/mid 80's and mid 90's (the two periods where Jerry was really frelled up): because people were there more for the "non-conformist time warp party" aspect of it, rather than hearing the band do what they used to do so well.

Excellent post. I do not include the Dead and the ABB with Phishy String cheesy music

[Grimjack]

It always boggles my mind that the greatest improvised music ever created struggles to find an audience while people eat this crap up like its Christmas. There is nothing remotely progressive in jam bands.

http://livemusicblog.com/2010/08/02/...nt-like-phish/

And it always boggles my mind that every few months someone finds a need to pick on Phish or Umphrey's McGee or the Grateful Dead and make a point that they're not prog. Oddly in this case, doing so by dragging in ANOTHER genre (jazz) and make an attempt to compare improv styles between "jam bands" and jazz (an apples to anchovies comparison) and then lament why more people don't like improv based jazz but DO like jambands (a question which has nothing to do with prog).
You don't like Phish or the Dead or Umphrey's? Don't listen, don't go see them, don't support them. You want more people to support "the greatest improvised music ever"? How about starting a thread with some recommendations and direct links to buy? That might demonstrate a genuine show of support for the artists you believe aren't getting the audience they deserve rather than reposting a 3+ year old overused internet meme tearing down a genre you clearly don't enjoy and many others here do? (regardless of whether or not you believe there is anything "remotely progressive" about it...and if you don't hear ANY prog in this, I have to wonder if you and I are listening to the same "prog")

[Jeremy Bender]

Some of us like jam bands and Jazz! Imagine that!

But...but....that's unpossible! There has to be a strict dividing line between genres and it must never be crossed! It's like me liking the prog Big 5 in the early 70's but also liking The Clash and Sex Pistols and Dead Kennedys later on!

And it always boggles my mind that every few months someone finds a need to pick on Phish or Umphrey's McGee or the Grateful Dead and make a point that they're not prog. Oddly in this case, doing so by dragging in ANOTHER genre (jazz) and make an attempt to compare improv styles between "jam bands" and jazz (an apples to anchovies comparison) and then lament why more people don't like improv based jazz but DO like jambands (a question which has nothing to do with prog).

Excellent, if we had a ratings system, I'd give that a +1000.

(but then, as I said, I've only heard bits and pieces of some of those groups)

So why should we care what you think? Jeebus.

But the reason Phish are as big as they are, really is the same reason the Dead were as big as they were, that being that they give people who didn't get the memo about the 60's ending an opportunity to party like it's 1969.

*YAWN* That has nothing to do with the current state of the Phish fan base. Sure, people go to their shows and get high and drunk and take psychedelics, big effing deal. Hell, metal fans aren't exactly poster children for Alcoholics Anonymous/Narcotics Anonymous either, they get blotto at shows too. Besides, all the Deadhead hangers on at Phish shows pretty much melted away during the second hiatus.

The reason that Phish can still fill 30,000 capacity venues is because.....wait for it.....they're a really good band. I don't care if anyone likes their music or their scene, but Phish *are* good songwriters, they *do* have terrific lyrics (and silly ones too), they *can* improv in Type II style (see the Tahoe Tweezer). Plus, in the 800+ shows I've been to, covering everything from one-chord drone bands to free jazz, I've never seen a crowd consistently dialed in to the music like a Phish crowd is.

and if you don't hear ANY prog in this, I have to wonder if you and I are listening to the same "prog")

Thanks for posting that UM clip, really looking forward to seeing them in March.

[PotatoSolution]

Bah, y'all old cranks. Phish is awesome.

Here's another reason why: http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/11/seat...ussell-wilson/

[mogrooves]

And this is why I love Phish!! - Heavy Zep riffs, early Gabriel-esque lyrics, jamming, jamming, jamming.

Well, that's 16:00 minutes of my life I'll never get back. As it began I thought, "Oh, descending fourth chords in the piano part. That's promising!" But, nah, judging by this example these guys have neither the chops nor the ideas to justify this degree of self-indulgence. This is aural abuse.

[Jimmy Giant]

Early Phish material is very unique, quirky and jazz laden. I made it to about 1994 before I dropped them, but I still love the old stuff. The first 3 were great, especially A Picture of Nectar. Once the Dead crowd really latched on, I stopped. Great musicians though.

The Allman Brothers are in a category of their own. Southern Rock? Yeah, Blues? Yeah. But no one wrote or played like those guys. Absolutely brilliant live. One of the best live bands I've ever seen. And a hell of a colorful history!

The Dead. Well, I've always heated them. Never thought their writing or performance was of any quality or merit. Possible exception might be their percussionist as I've heard lots of praise for him. And CSN really like Jerry's steel guitar playing. But to me, it just awful listening. And I've had to endue loads of this crap, so it's not just a passing statement. Even in college, I had to buy weed at a Dead house, so I was always subject to shitty bootleg cassettes of meandering atrocities.

I'm not big on jam bands, but the high quality exceptions are made. However, 33 minute versions of Tweezer is 30 minutes too long! The music has to be interesting and flow from the soul to accomplish long play. Too few bands can do that.

[JJ88]

Where The Grateful Dead are concerned, I actually like the long, 'Dark Star' type stuff. It's the 'songs' I don't really connect with. Bands like The Allman Brothers, Quicksilver etc. always seemed much more 'rock and roll' to me than The Grateful Dead. See also the Welsh band Man.

The Phish/jam band phenomena means virtually nothing in Britain. There are some acts that fill arenas in the US that I'm not sure I've ever heard a note of.

[ThomasKDye]

And this is why I love Phish!! - Heavy Zep riffs, early Gabriel-esque lyrics, jamming, jamming, jamming.

Eh, I found myself liking that more than I expected. Mostly it works as background music, the way a lot of Deep Purple's extended jams on the two 70s "In Concert" records did.

The thing about jamming is it goes against something I hold valuable…. relistenability. While I'd play that extended jam if I were trying to write, I wouldn't seek it out to hold my interest, because it doesn't. When I'm in that kind of a mood, all I can think is "Are you guys done yet?"

[Grimjack]

Well, that's 16:00 minutes of my life I'll never get back. As it began I thought, "Oh, descending fourth chords in the piano part. That's promising!" But, nah, judging by this example these guys have neither the chops nor the ideas to justify this degree of self-indulgence. This is aural abuse.

Opinions will vary...taste and perspective can be as unique as fingerprints. But I think there are significantly fewer folks who could identify a fourth chord vs those who enjoy grooving to what they perceive to be an enjoyable jam which may partially explain the OP's lament about why Phish continue to fill arenas while jazz plays to a more select audience. I can't argue one way or another as far as Phish's musical "ideas" (there's that pesky opinion factor again) but I wasn't aware there was a calculation how much "self-indulgence" a musician or group of musicians could justify based on their chops...can you post it please?

[Rarebird]

To me Phish sounds like 2 groups on one stage playing 2 different songs at the same time.

And to me free jazz sounds like a group of musicans on stage all practising scales, tuning their instruments or trying to make some noise at the same time.

[mogrooves]

I wasn't aware there was a calculation how much "self-indulgence" a musician or group of musicians could justify based on their chops...can you post it please?

16:12

16:13

[tallliman]

I hope people are listening to that version of Wizard Burial Ground posted above. I enjoy a lot of the jam band material especially Umphrey's. They often have sets of music for free download on their soundcloud page if you're interested. Phish can be hit and miss for me, I need to be in the mood for it as I find it less involved than Umphrey's. However, I'm not sure one can go wrong with their earlier recordings which to my mind are definitely prog (as are Umphrey's to me).

It's music with lots of fairly structured improv but that goes off into many different directions. Exactly what I often like hearing!

[Splicer]

I liked Phish for a hot minute back in the 90s but after a while, the extended jams just seemed like the same jam to me. If you were to play me a bunch of different jams from Phish, I would not be able to tell them apart or know which song there were attached to.

[Grimjack]

16:12

16:13

Got it...so approximately 4:03 per musician. Is this a sliding scale? i.e., if the guitarist had significantly more chops than the bassist would he get more time? And is this applied universally across all genres? And once it hits 4:03 per musician, is the entire composition categorized as "aural abuse" or would an individual musician get some sort of "dispensation" if his/her contribution had a more acceptable ratio of chops to indulgence vs his/her bandmates? Is there a ceiling when it comes to large ensembles/orchestras? What about solo musicians who use loops/laptops/backing tracks...how does that work? How long has this scale been in place? Who participated in setting it? How often is it updated?
By all means...please continue to enlighten...this is fascinating stuff. I've got a buttload more questions...shall I continue to post them here or send them to you via PM?
I'm being facetious of course solely to point out the ABSURD notion that a perceived degree of self-indulgence is or isn't justified by one's "chops". You found this particular Carini jam lacking or musically unsatisfying based on your own preferences, or it simply left you cold? OK then. Maybe Phish isn't for you, or maybe there's other Phish that would do it for you. Continue to pursue or don't, that's up to you...there's no shortage of A+ acts out there in search of an audience and perhaps YOU are it mogrooves. But you clearly have some understanding of music beyond casual listening based on your comment about descending chords and fourths, and your original statement about a lack of chops being part of some non-existent (and also apparently arbitrary) scale used to "justify" self-indulgence seems inconsistent with that.
I'm not here to defend Phish but more to call out the BS criticism. Criticism is great, but lame criticism is just noise.
Yeah, Phish were a big part of my life 20+ years ago and (in my opinion) they aren't making music NEARLY as interesting now as they were then. I also haven't liked their songwriting since 1996. Not my cup o' tea. They've largely stopped taking risks in their jamming which has made their live shows too predictable for me. Trey's guitar skills aren't what they were. The band as a whole doesn't practice enough so they flub a lot of their more complex composed pieces which drives me mental. So more negatives than positives, and I vote with my wallet. That doesn't mean that they still don't have plenty of prog in their DNA, nor does it mean that that they still aren't highly, highly skilled musicians with plenty of chops.
By all means, say they suck if that's what you think. Say that other acts are far more deserving of the fanbase that Phish has built if that's what you think. Criticize their music, their jams, their fans, their business model and the stereotypes of their fans if that's what you believe is true and you don't like those things. But to claim they lack chops or that "there's nothing remotely progressive" about them honestly says lot more about the person making such claims than it does about Phish and their music. Maybe you just haven't heard enough of the right Phish.
Let's see...start listening at around 2:04 in and then lets have a conversation about chops and prog:

and for some different examples of jamming (not all of it good, and if you're looking for something to compete with one of Zappa's early 70s ensembles you should look elsewhere) on their most recent tour (warning...this starts with the Carini jam so fast forward about 9 minutes to move on to other jams):

[Jeremy Bender]

The Phish/jam band phenomena means virtually nothing in Britain. There are some acts that fill arenas in the US that I'm not sure I've ever heard a note of.

And vice versa. Manic Street Preachers can still fill arenas in the UK, the last time they were in Los Angeles, they could barely sell out the Troubador twice, that's not even 300 tickets and in a city that has the largest population of Brits outside of the UK. See also: Robbie Williams, most British boy bands and so on.

And to me free jazz sounds like a group of musicians on stage all practising scales, tuning their instruments or trying to make some noise at the same time