NYE '96 Set 2

[Chris I Bertelsen]

|From: Charles Andrew Dirksen <dirk...@dons.ac.usfca.edu>
|Date: 19 Jan 1997 20:24:36 GMT
|
|Hey, I want to pick a fight with those of you unimpressed by the second
|set of the New Year's show. Listen to the tapes. Now, please explain
how
|this isn't an above average set of phish's MUSIC? Just because the
|setlist wasn't easily called doesn't make it a bad set musically. I
|honestly have difficulty fathoming the opinion of people who can't
respect the >improvisation in the Simple and the Hood from that set. I
mean,
|christ, not to mention the fact that Character Zero is the most heavily
|jammed version of the year. Even the bloody Chalkdust opener has some
|gumption for Icculus' sake. Anyway, setlist aside, I think the music of
|the second set was clearly above average. I can't tell you how relieved
I
|was to hear trey hitting all the right notes in the composed sections of
|songs, as opposed to what he did frequently on previous nights in the
run

I don't see why everyone is so bent out of shape about this set.
I'm a sucker for anything off of Billy Breathes, and I'm not afraid to
admit that I like the "Trendy" Phish songs, but this was still a
WONDERFUL set. The opening numbers were very well played (not
phenominal, but still awesome), and the Simple>Swept>Steep>HH> Caspian
jam absolutely rocked the house. It's been a long time since I've heard
such a well coordinated string of songs (actually, I never have).
Simple... 'nough said. Swept>Steep gave a good breather, HH shook the
rafters, and that WAS the best Character Zer0 I've ever heard (god damn
right, Charlie). I was sort of hoping for HH as the encore (and if they
had played it, or something comprable, I would have known I was in
heaven), but it fit just as well where they put it. Even if the show had
ended after the second set like a normal show, and we had all gone home,
I would have been VERY happy with the music I heard. The rocking third
was just icing on an already very sweet cake.

-Chris Bertelsen

[Jeremy David Goodwin]

I think the second set of NYE opened very dissapointingly. The first three
songs. I had visions of Drowned dancing in my head when they came out
after setbreak, and Chalk, Wilson, Sparkle was anything but historical.
However, I think the rest of the set is quite satisfying indeed. I had
been anticipating the monster Simple of the Run all week, and although
this is not the percussion laden upbeat jamfest I was hoping for (and
received, btw, at Charlotte) it is obviously quite good. Trey surprisingly
didn't take to the kit at all (has anyone pointed out the dearth of
percussion visits by Trey during the Run? Very surprising, I thought) and
soloed in quite a mellow and beautiful manner. Considering that Simple was
the one major jam tune they had allotted for that set, I was surprised
when it ended so (relatively) quickly, but the segue is smooth and I for
one _really_ enjoyed Swept Away->Steep, particularly the ultracool
transition between the two. The crowd around me seemed unimpressed, but I
was rocking in my own way, quite vigorously.
A cynic would point out the perdonderance of Billy Breathes tunes
on a set that was to be broadcast on the radio, but the segue into Caspian
is surprising and clean and it was fun to see Trey jumping around in
accompaniment to his power cords, if not musically inspiring (in a
highbrow sense). Pop in 12/30/95 to review the improvements in this song.

While on the subject of NYE...the response to the DWD seems
universally positive...but does anyone else feel that even the most
glorious of DWDs doesn't really _go_ anywhere? I guess this is what is
meant by permagroove. With both the Clifford Ball and NYE DWDs (probably
the two most heralded of the year), I am _much_ more interested when the
jam finally takes a different turn, late in the song. On 8/16, Fish
shuffles up the beat and leads Trey into the eventual NICU groove and
segue. On ˙NYE, I think the best and most interesting part of the jam is
when it slows into that funk mode, which some have identified as a Great
Curve tease. During this part of the jam, Trey was bouncing one of the
large, three foot diameter balloons with his head, to great success. From
here on out the jam is much more satisfying than the endless "almost
playing the theme but not quite" soloing from Trey which permeates most of
these glorious DWDs. Note that yes, I still think it's glorious. But it is
probably also repetitive, and if you don't like the main riff of the song,
too bad for you.
BTW, after this funk section, do you notice how close Trey comes
to returning to the theme, before embarking on a few more minutes of
interesting jamming? Every time I listen to the tape I think the jam's
over, and am pleasantly surprised.
In short, I'll happily take as many extended, glorious DWds as the
band chooses to play in front of me. But I think the best parts tend to be
the "afterthought" of the jam, before it falls apart into a segue or the
closing chorus.
Jeremy

"You keep buying these things, but you don't need them
But as long as you're comfortable, it feels like freedom" --Billy Bragg
-****************************************************************************-
-****************************************************************************-
"America is a dark land, before the Indians, before the settlers. The evil
was there waiting" --William S. Burroughs

[John J. Flynn]

|While on the subject of NYE...the response to the DWD seems
|universally positive...but does anyone else feel that even the most
|glorious of DWDs doesn't really _go_ anywhere? I guess this is what is
|meant by permagroove.

Yes! Jeremy makes an extremely valid point here. I for one, as i've
expressed was not impressed w/ NYE at all. The first set I loved. The
other two, I didn't. 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.

Both Boston shows of the NYE run were laden with Type One "jamming" and
virtually had no type Two Jamming.

Let's make a list of the catagories songs fall into. The basic "test" that
one can run is if you can siong the main "riff" of the song throughout the
song, the chord progression is the same.

Type one songs become:

DWD (there are exceptions, I'll dicuss that later)
Hood
Slave
some versions of Stash
Antelope
Reba
Theme
Coil (admit it, most of Page's solos sound the same)
plus songs like Chalkdust etc.

Type two songs:

Tweezer (sometimes)
Mike's (sometimes)
Weekapaug (sometimes)
Bowie
I'm sure there are a few others...

Now, how much does one version of a type on song differ from another? I'll
argue not much. Hood is a great song, I love it dearly... it doens't
change all that much, it might be better played, but all we get is a three
chord progression for about ten minutes until they put the melody over it.
DWD has the same problem, sure, it has a groove, but it is the same groove
over and over, it doesn't go anywhere most of the time. The one major
exception that comes to mind is 12/12/95, which was a DWD that went
somewhere... chrods changes, the musical idioms changes, and it was
interesting to listen to. The tweezer of 12/30/96 was Type one. You can
sing the tweezer lick over it throughout, and the rhythms are pretty muich
the same (I don't have the tapes, so don't come back at me wiht "at 10:43
fishman drops a beat and Trey changes a chord", I'm going on general
impression). To compare a Tweezer from a year earlier, take 12/28/95.
Textures change, the musical idiom changes, again it is interesing.

I went to a Medeski Martin andWood concert this fall and walked out on it.
I love their albums. They have the potential not to fall into a type one
rut, however, all they did was play the same groove over and over, and I
had better things to do with my time. Medeski, M&W is falling into the
same trap that Phish appears to be fallen into. Sure, drugged out drunks
are going to like a groove.... but when the scene directs the music as
opposed to the music directing the scene, there is a problem.

I decided after being in an altered state at a Phish show a couple of
summers ago that I enjoy Phish more when I'm sober because I can listen to
the music and appreciate it. In order to appreciate these type one jams,
espescially in songs like DWD on NYE, I really need to stop going to shows
sober....

Now I know I'll get the response, well much of Jazz is type one... soloing
over a fixed progression. Yes and no. A lot of jazz isn't, and even the
jazz that is, the progression they are soloing over is not I-IV-V, it
usually is just a tad more interesting and provides a lot more oportunities
for the solo.

Segues fall into group two. Phish improvises a bridge between songs. the
Boston shows had few, if any, real segues (Swept Away>steep is a composed
segue, listen to BB). Hood came out of Steep, it wasn't segued... a segue
is that such as the 12/239/95 Gin>Real Me, or the 12/30/93 Mike's>Horse, or
Tweezerfest.

I go to a show to here type two jams. I enjoy type one songs, but they
aren't the highlights of the show. When people say they like Phish because
they never know what to expect, that is type two reasoning. Unfortunately,
the population that truly apreciates the type two jamming is diminshing as
the scene grows and becomes more of an atered state festival. I was
disgusted with the scene in Boston, more so than I was last time I saw
Phish NYE'95 in Worcester, when I also was disgusted with the scene.

So why am I a jaded fan? Phish is capapble of Type two. I want to hear
Phish play Type Two music. As a general rule of thumb, I like to think as
set one as type one, and set two as type two. when they both become type
one, that constuitutes an overdose, and a compomise of Phish's musical
abiliuties.

I'll stop rambling. Questions, comments, suggestions, I'm open, but spare
me the "why don't you stop seeing Phish" posts... I think we're all big
enough that we can handle a discussion such as this....

Hugs and kisses,
John

[James Douglas]

Well, i am tempted to whip out the flame thrower and set fire to this
discussion, but hey, i'm grown up enough to keep it civil, so here we
go...

Now I definitely hear wher you are coming from with the "type I, Type II"
discussion of jamming. yes, indeed, those jams you mentioned are based
around a set number of chords, a definite structure, which the boys
rarely, if ever, stray from. however, i think you're missing out on a LOT
of amazing music by dismissing such jamming and boring and repetitive (and
in that other joker's post, cheese!). trey, mike, Page and Fish do a
tremendous amount of jamming within that structrue and play some really
fabulous music. I just got the NYE show and I LOVE that DWD, and no, I was
not AT ALL fucked up when I listened to it. Maybe its just a matter of
listening a bit closer, hearing what each individaul is doing in that
structure and appreciating what comes from those contributions...synergy
at its finest!
Now, don't get me wrong, i am not trying to imply that I am more
sophisticated than thou b/c I like these jams and you don't...I'm just
giving the other side a voice. And yes, I love it when they move outside
that structure. My favorite DWD is still 6-26-95....don't even try to say
that baby is standard jamming on three chords! That shoots way out into
space and back again several times, much like a plethora a Tweezers,
several Mike's and countless other jams.
Finally, regarding segues, I couldn't agree more...Phish needs to work on
the TRUE segue...they can do it, we've heard em do it to AMAZING
results....well, maybe in '97

thanks for reading
Jim
jdou...@Capital.net

[Dancb157]

Down with the Cheese

I am sick of Down w/cheese on every damn tape. The jam goes on forever
and it gets boring. It's no Mike's jam, YEM or SOAM jam and I don't see
how anybody really really jams to this song.

dan

[Eric Burns]

Well Dan,

You clearly have NOT heard the kind of DwD's that many of the rest
of us have. The 6-26-95 is out to lunch (and I mean that as a com-
pliment), but my fave is still the wonderful 11-12-94 version which
is DwD->jam->Have Mercy->jam->DwD (groove, no voc. reprise)->Lifeboy.
Changing tempos, neato transitions, totally inspiring jamming and a
very graceful drop into my favorite Lifeboy (great playing, and sung
with gusto).

Amazing. As soon as I heard 11-12 for the first time (thanks to
Victor G.) I knew why DwD _can_ be an amazing tune. I would highly
recommend it (sadly, I can't accept any grovels/trades right now).

Getting back to John's 'type I vs. type II' jams, I see his point,
but hey, not EVERY song can just 'jump ship' and go off into never
never land. To expect that ANY band can just abandon everything
that's been presented (musically) and just take off is, well, a bit
overly optimistic. I mean, I love weird-ass, free-form jamming (see
Coltrane-Live in Japan if you want to try to comprehend total, im-
provisational jamming), but to expect coherence amid the chaos of
'pure improvisation' is preposterous. If John's idea of a perfect
set is Mud Island 95 (the Tweezer set), more power to him. But I
would seriously doubt that it is.

Also, I'm appalled that John would walk out of a MM&W show. If he
had stayed, he might have heard that indeed, they DO vary jams and
tempos. His walking out was his loss. Man, I saw them in November
months back and it was f*cking fantastic.

Anyway, keep on writing and feel free to flame away, in a coherent
and hilarious way.

EB

"Mmmmmmmmmmm, I'd do ANYTHING for a drop of sweet
beer..."
-Homer Simpson

[Steven Kwartin]

John makes some excellent points. We all go to the shows for the jam
(don't we?), otherwise buy the studio albums, stay home and save
money. It is the exploration of new musical turf, previously unseen and
unheard, that constitutes the holy grail.
Type one jams are jams, but may amount to not much more than
another view of the same scenery, from a different angle. Granted
sometimes it can be a spectacular aerial view, but it is still the same
background.
Type two jams take you to a place you have never been before, and
show you an entirely new mountain range, canyon, galaxy or on
occasion a parallel universe. Why do you think that we crotchety old
bastards began following the Dead in the first place. Obviously, for the
very same reason.
In the older, more freeform days, you would warm up to set one
music, which had some solid type one jams (with an occasional two), but
it was the second or third set, where the band left this earth for musical
parts unknown, that justified the trip. It was particularly during the
monumental segues that the type two jams would occur.
In my view, the reason is very simple. Think of any given song as a
box. There is an entry door on one side and an exit door on the other
side. Once you enter the box, you are in a defined space. Some songs
are much bigger boxes than others, and therefore allow for a lot more
variation, wandering and jamming, however, it is all happening within the
four corners of the box. Many boxes are large enough to accommodate
intense type two jams without hitting the edges, others have very little
room. But once you go out the exit door of one box, and before you enter
the next box, you are in musical interstellar space. There is no box, no
walls, no exit door. It is pure creative space, a blank canvas. This is the
truest form of the type two jam.
Unfortunately, by the end of the Dead's long run, there was very little
type two jamming to be heard, hence my shift of touring dollars into the
Phish account.
There have been a lot of recent negative posts regarding whether the
band has peaked, whether they are in a rut, problems with the scene,
etc. There is a lot to be learned from the lessons of those who have
traveled before you. I think there is a lot of type two jamming right now
and more to come. On the other hand, I don't want the band to burn-out,
or get swallowed up by external problems unrelated to music. Last time I
checked, they were still mere mortals--talented ones--but mortal
nonetheless.
I guess the message of the last part of this ramble is don't keep trying
to milk the cow until it dies, now and again let it rest, and if you do, we
will all get to eat ice cream (insert apology to vegans here). Unfortunately,
some day the cow will be gone and we will all wonder why we
complained about the flavor of the ice cream that was served one day in
the past, even if it wasn't our favorite. Steve

[Art Brostrom]

Right on, Steve! Couldn't say it better myself....these guys are placing their
lives in context right now...look out for the next phase 'cuz it could tear
the roof off!
-Art