the end of phish
May 25, 2004 1:55 PM   Subscribe

Phish to break up, according to CNN.
posted by reklaw (57 comments total)
 
Who will casually pick and stroll along with the grubby torch? The real losers are the acid dealers. Maybe the government will step in to help them.
posted by Mayor Curley at 2:03 PM on May 25, 2004


Well "Let It Be" and all that.
posted by DaRiLo at 2:05 PM on May 25, 2004


Phish to break up

And yet, somehow, the world goes on.
posted by Stynxno at 2:08 PM on May 25, 2004


Who the what now?
posted by Dillenger69 at 2:13 PM on May 25, 2004


I wish I could say I cared but I gave up on Phish years ago when they were billed as the next Grateful Dead and the Dead were still around.

And then there was that weird, quasi molestation thing last September.
posted by fenriq at 2:21 PM on May 25, 2004


dude, like, no.
posted by Satapher at 2:21 PM on May 25, 2004


Smart marketing. Now they can have endless "reunion" tours and release boxed sets with "previously unreleased" cuts. I never listened to them, were they any good?
posted by Eekacat at 2:24 PM on May 25, 2004


This was the band that made the most consistently interesting and adventurous rock music to come out of the US for the last ten years. Grieve, you fools.
posted by muckster at 2:29 PM on May 25, 2004


consistently interesting and adventurous rock music

*belly laugh*

Whoo! Somebody get this man a HBO special!
posted by keswick at 2:36 PM on May 25, 2004


made the most consistently interesting and adventurous rock music to come out of the US for the last ten years.

Now that was funny.
posted by dhoyt at 2:37 PM on May 25, 2004


Jinxed again!
posted by dhoyt at 2:38 PM on May 25, 2004


No matter how high I got, I still didn't get it. My loss, perhaps.
posted by ubermesh at 2:48 PM on May 25, 2004


ditto
posted by Satapher at 2:50 PM on May 25, 2004


Can anyone explain the apparent correlation between being a Phish fan and being a Ween fan?
posted by sonofsamiam at 3:00 PM on May 25, 2004


When PinkStainlessTail posted "Bin Laden location traded for Gmail account" to MeTa I thought it was one of the funniest things I'd read in a long time. Within a few hours you topped him, muckster. I literally laughed out loud. Thanks and congrats.
posted by dobbs at 3:03 PM on May 25, 2004


Can anyone explain the apparent correlation between being a Phish fan and being a Ween fan?

Other than a coincidence of happening to like 2 good bands, Phish has covered the Ween song "Roses are Free" in concert a bunch of times. But be warned, mentioning Phish to some of the more...fundamentalist Ween fans can be dangerous. ; )
posted by stifford at 3:10 PM on May 25, 2004


Interesting, isn't it, that this is announced one day after President Bush promised to raze the Abu Ghraib prison? Looks like torture is on the way out worldwide.
posted by eperker at 3:31 PM on May 25, 2004


mentioning Phish to some of the more...fundamentalist Ween fans can be dangerous.

I think that can be generalized to fans of actual music in general. ;)
posted by badstone at 3:32 PM on May 25, 2004


Well, the fact is that a hell of a lot of people had a hell of a good time with Phish, and I don't see why so many here enjoy shitting on that. For anybody who's curious, check out LivePhish for downloads and a streaming radio station.
posted by muckster at 3:35 PM on May 25, 2004


Quick! Ready the EMP bomb!
posted by keswick at 3:38 PM on May 25, 2004


Could a Phish fan step in and help all of us out on their appeal? I've tried listening, but really, it's just boring. The jams are slow and laborious. Someone please influence me with a link or two to counter my experiences.
posted by Mach3avelli at 3:42 PM on May 25, 2004


Civil_Disobedient wrote about this very well recently, Mach3avelli.
posted by muckster at 3:52 PM on May 25, 2004


Could a Phish fan step in and help all of us out on their appeal?

I'm not a huge fan - especially not by Phish-head standards - but I can tell you this much: I was sorta dragged to Lemonwheel (three-day gig/carnival in rural Maine) in '98. Agreed to go for the "cultural experience," basically. Never liked much of what I'd heard of their studio albums (though "Fee" is a fun little ditty). Never liked the Dead. Was blown away. They are a transcendent live band. I know how you-had-to-be-there-man that sounds, but there's really no other explanation for why almost anyone who's seen them live thinks they're brilliant and most people who haven't think they're shite.

That said, I don't think a link would do much good. Lemonwheel's among the top five live shows I've ever seen, but I've never bought a Phish studio album nor even traded/downloaded for a live show. I listen to a friend's recordings of live shows from time to time, but mostly just as a kind of memory-boost. I don't think I'd be impressed by a recording if I'd never seen them myself, so I wouldn't expect anyone else to be, either.
posted by gompa at 3:57 PM on May 25, 2004


I have a few Phish albums, but the appeal of the band is in the live performances, which I never saw. I did get into A Picture of Nectar, which is the album you're supposed to start with, or was at the time. "Your hands and feet are mangoes, you're gonna be a genius anyway." I also got The Rift, which was recommended to me as being the closest thing to progressive rock they ever did, and it was all right.

Billy Breathes, while not at all typical of the group, is a fine album of relatively short pop songs. Very accessible and catchy. And basically the only album they ever made like that, as far as I can tell.
posted by kindall at 3:59 PM on May 25, 2004


ubermesh, right idea, wrong intoxicant. Phish, back in the days before they were equated with the Dead, were a Vermont acid band. Go to a show, they're trippin', you're tripping, life's bitchin' and then you remember that its freaking cold outside and you've got nothing to eat but Ramen.
posted by fenriq at 4:15 PM on May 25, 2004


Wow, I thought the love for this band was frightening, but it looks like the hatred for it is even worse.
posted by jragon at 4:33 PM on May 25, 2004


Wow, just got off of work and this is on Yahoo's frontpage. Well, damn. I can't say I'm surprised... they took a hiatus a couple of years ago and it seemed like the "reunion" was a bit forced. Creatively, I think Trey is right -- they've run their course, offered what they could to the world, and are taking their leave to pursue individual projects.

Explaining Phish to someone is a rather pointless endeavor. There are so many stereotypes that people will subscribe to, facts be damned; hell a bunch of MeFi's above have already pretty much covered the bases. Don't worry, Britney is still making music for you.

This is a sad day for music, but remember that just about ever show they ever did is floating around somewhere.

And naysayers, please try and understand this: Phish got to where they are (/were) through the love of their fans alone. No labels made them or controlled them. By the time they finally signed a contract, they had a strong enough fanbase that they could negotiate their own rules (like allowing tapers at the concerts). During the New Year's show of 2000, the Phish concert in Florida was the largest millennial gathering in the world. It may be decades before another band has as strong a connection with its fans.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 4:36 PM on May 25, 2004


I've seen Phish thirty-something times, in stadiums all over the country, in a grubby bar in Dublin, a ball room in Prague, in the middle of the Everglades and on top of an air traffic control tower, and I was with them for the millennium, when they played a non-stop 8-hour set from midnight to sunrise. To me, the fascination was always the surprise: you never knew what you were going to get. Phish has covered the Beatles, the Stones, Johann Strauss, the Beastie Boys, Henri Mancini, Bob Marley, the Talking Heads, the Velvet Underground, Jay-Z, Elvis, Sinatra, Sly, Hendrix, Zappa, Prince, Zeppelin, the Who, Pink Floyd, Duke Ellington, ZZ Top, and yes, Ween--and they've made all of those songs their own. Their willingness to try stuff, to go for it in front of a huge audience, was amazing. They have a repertoire of over 600 songs, and they're ready to take any of them anywhere, on a whim. At any given show, you might hear geeky prog rock, raging stadium rock, sweet ballads, disco, handmade techno space grooves, an a cappella number, or a bluegrass song--and in 1997, it was all about the porno funk. You might see guests like Parliament/Funkadelic, BB King, or Kid Rock, or the drummer might play "Feel My Heat" from the Boogie Nights soundtrack on a vacuum cleaner. They might do an odd rareity from Trey's Gamehendge song cycle, and then they'll close the show with a vicious cover of Hendrix' "Fire."

As for the jams, sometimes they remind me of those stereo images that were all the rage a while ago--you're either seeing a bunch of dots, or, when you look just right, it springs to life. You either hear it, or you don't. As gompa says, being there while it happens helps. The only advice I'd have for Mach3avelli is, listen to more of it--some of the jams were slow and laborious; most weren't.

Recommended further reading: digaman's Control for Smilers Can't Be Bought and, if you're really interested, Richard Gehr's Phish Book.
posted by muckster at 4:47 PM on May 25, 2004


Oh yeah, C&D. The only two forms of music out there are fight-the-power jam bands like Phish and corporate whores like Britney. Ergo, if one does not like (or even loathes) Phish, he must be a mainstream whore. Certainly, anyone who is enlightened and has good taste must adore 15 minute self-indulgent guitar solos and pungent malodor.
posted by keswick at 4:52 PM on May 25, 2004


I'm afraid I'm going to have to step in here and speak up on behalf of this band, which has been like a close friend to me for the past ten years. In terms of musicianship, showmanship, and artistic integrity they have few peers in contemporary American music, and what they were able to accomplish without a lot of exposure on MTV or Top 40 radio should garner them respect, even from Metafilter (which has a habit of turning into a sob-fest every time a marginally relevant poet or playwright checks out). This band held the largest concert in North America in 1996. They were named the most important band of the 1990s by Rolling Stone. And on top of that, they allowed all of their concerts to be taped and traded freely by their fans. They post their shows for download within a day or two and donate all the proceeds to charity. They played from before midnight until the sun came up on New Years Eve 1999-2000 without stopping. They played four straight nights in Red Rocks without repeating a song. Over the past few years, they have played all of their shows without predetermining the set list. So I don't know. Maybe there are a lot of bands out there that can drop the entire White Album or all of Quadrophenia into the second set of a three set concert, or play any one of several hundred songs at a moment's notice, that continually evolve in the kind of albums they release and in the way that they play their material live, that respect their fan base, that have managed to achieve success without selling out, and that are active in numerous charitable causes in their communities. Maybe if they had a weblog...
posted by alphanerd at 5:03 PM on May 25, 2004


Certainly, anyone who is enlightened and has good taste must adore 15 minute self-indulgent guitar solos and pungent malodor.

not necessarily, but anyone who is familiar with the state of contemporary commercial music will likely respect the massive acclaim that a bunch of hippie-esque musicians received without any support from the corporate marketing machine.

i've never been a fan of the music, but i'm glad Phish was around. those guys and Ani DiFranco are pretty much my version of the American Dream.

i certainly don't understand the antagonism.
posted by mrgrimm at 5:03 PM on May 25, 2004


Fifteen minute guitar solos, huh? Have you actually listened to them, or are you just taking a play from the "I hate jam bands" book? I've seen (and listened to) perhaps hundreds of shows, and I don't remember any 15 minute guitar solos. I know of a couple of 15 minute piano solos, and a couple of long drum solos. But when Trey is playing, there's usually someone else playing as well.

God, you must hate that self-indulgent Miles Davis, too. Or that distortion-playing punk Jimi whats-his-name?
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 5:04 PM on May 25, 2004


Actually, I like early Miles. I mean, crap, they practically issue you "Kind Of Blue" with a pack of Djarums when you go to college. His later stuff leaves me cold.

While I enjoy the occasional Hendrix track, I've never got around to buying any of the constant re-re-re-re-re-remasters of any of his albums or compilations, mainly because the songs I do enjoy are generally played every five minutes on any given classic rock station.

Oh, and for the record? Yeah, I hate jam bands.
posted by keswick at 5:12 PM on May 25, 2004


play any one of several hundred songs at a moment's notice

My ass, its just one really, really long song.
posted by ChasFile at 5:24 PM on May 25, 2004


I'm sure there are a few anti-Phish comments by people who don't really know the band all so well but to me, this:

Don't worry, Britney is still making music for you.

is easily the most ignorant comment in the thread, and, frankly my biggest peeve about fanboys for any band.

You're upset because people are passing judgement on your musical taste yet you're willing to do it right back when you don't even know what the dissenters listen to! Guess what: that's a clue that you're a little over sensitive on the topic and are hardly able to discuss it with any subjectivity whatsoever.
posted by dobbs at 6:26 PM on May 25, 2004


I'd never follow Phish around and have not even one of their cds (no accounting for tastes), but I have nothing but respect for the way this group of individuals loves music. All music. 'sides, they are damned decent humans. Alphanerd said it better.

Aside: There's a major difference between play/improvisation and gratuitous solos in music.
posted by vers at 6:35 PM on May 25, 2004


Mach3avelli: Listen to it on acid.
posted by untuckedshirts at 6:36 PM on May 25, 2004


though my taste for phish has sort of soured compared to my college days, i still have a tremendous amount of respect for them.

i think part of the reason for them parting ways is because people would dismiss them much the same way as people would dismiss any other extremely popular music. as has been said by many members of the band recently...it sucks to be 'that guy from phish'....that people, like keswick, automatically dismiss, without knowing a thing about them. for serious musicians it sucks not to be taken seriously.

strictly in the big arena rock band idiom, they are up there with the most technically proficient players this side of zappa. that's not even getting into their catalogue, which is *enormous* and would be be dipped into on stage like a 40 gig ipod on shuffle.

in the 90's when the band was a well practiced machine that was hitting on all cylinders, they were hard to top in the live setting. when they came back from hiatus, the weight of their catalogue and not dedicating themselves to practicing showed how much they had accomplished before and how much they had changed, that their heart, particularly trey, was not in it.

they'll probably come back like any other pop culture figure that announce their retirement only to change their mind down the line.
posted by oliver_crunk at 7:05 PM on May 25, 2004


Don't worry, Britney is still making music for you.

oh please.

phish fans are smelly and they babble a lot. and, as demonstrated by this thread, they think they know something that others don't. (delusions and hallucinations are a side-effect of drug abuse.) that's enough reason to dislike them as far as i'm concerned.

that, and this "break up" will last a couple years at most.
posted by kjh at 7:19 PM on May 25, 2004


I don't know why it's cool to dislike Phish. I don't like 'em, and never have. But they're just another band, and they've got a slew of fans that enjoy their music. Why should I spoil the fun?

I've got my obscure death metal and I'm happy. The Phish fans have their memories and the chance to talk about their band, and they're happy. Why all the berrating?

Speaking as a fan of consistently maligned music, back off people!
posted by Dark Messiah at 7:28 PM on May 25, 2004


... and jam bands around the world paused for an hour of silence.
(I kid, I kid.)

Don't worry, Britney is still making music for you.

Well, I'd never come between OW and Britney, but Toxic is one of my favorite songs this year.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:11 PM on May 25, 2004


I don't regard myself as a fan of Phish, but sheesh. Feeling the need to crap on some band doesn't exactly shed light on what people might find in music. There's plenty of opinion and so what. You don't like the band, big wow. Hey, pull out all those rational big-brain analyses of why x band sucks. It makes no difference to anyone except yourself.

Music eviscerates the need for analysis. Tracing one's like/dislike of a style/group/artist back to something concrete, which applies to all listeners, doesn't work. It's the most intensely subjective form of art there is. So I shouldn't be surprised that some people feel the knee-jerk need to compare and contrast concepts that can't even be expressed in words. You just end up betraying your own inability to precisely describe what's 'right' and 'wrong'. Save it for the politics; some people here (like me, for example) have a hard enough time with that, even when there are actual facts to use, abuse, twist and distort.
posted by attackthetaxi at 1:07 AM on May 26, 2004


That junk above could be misconstrued as me saying I know more about music than you. The intent was the opposite. Music is a tough subject.
posted by attackthetaxi at 1:31 AM on May 26, 2004


I think the levels of hatred aimed at Phish and their "anti-corporate" ilk is more to do with the rampant delusion of their fanbase that they are somehow above Britney, Nsync and almost every other recording artist because they have a less obvious marketing department.

Quotes like

"but anyone who is familiar with the state of contemporary commercial music will likely respect the massive acclaim that a bunch of hippie-esque musicians received without any support from the corporate marketing machine"

have been said since the dawn of the record industry, just exchange hippie-esque for rockers, punks, indie, ravers, or whomever is going after the anti-corporate dollar at the moment. It's not the same levels of snobbery which jazz fans can attain, but it's still annoying.

Or to put it another way, I bet their accountant and lawyers are gutted.

before anyone says it, yeah i know the above doesn't apply because Phish were different
posted by fullerine at 2:36 AM on May 26, 2004


The Jazz dig (nopunintended) had nothing to do with Y2karls' god-like post further down the front page by the way.
posted by fullerine at 2:40 AM on May 26, 2004


fullerine - i guess the difference would be is that phish found their demographic by chance and more commercial bands find theirs by calculation. I respect phish and like them, but i think they're an example of a decent band of musicians who never had anything especially deep to say. They're enjoyable to me, but their vaunted non-commercial status of "we're just playing for our own fans" doesn't make them great artists. Their songwriting was kind of weak and the one emotion i got from their music was whimsical humor. Some of their jams were very good ... but they never approached the emotional level of Jerry singing "Morning Dew" ... or Christine Aguilera singing "Beautiful" ... or Macy Gray.

In short, you do have a point. It's funny how few people look down on the Beatles or the Motown artists for being commercial creations - and why should they? They were great.

Phish were merely good.
posted by pyramid termite at 3:13 AM on May 26, 2004


I'm thinking most of the Phish-hate is actually meant for annoying Phish fans we've all had to deal with. If so, that's not right either.

I loathe the garden variety Tool fan -- the ones constantly telling me the true meaning of Maynard's lyrics -- but I would never turn that hate on the band. They're just making tunes; it's not their fault a bunch of loudmouth pods have become obssessed with it.
posted by Dark Messiah at 3:36 AM on May 26, 2004


people are passing judgement on your musical taste yet you're willing to do it right back when you don't even know what the dissenters listen to!

Yes! See how annoying it is? Yet when Phish was compared to a scene of Iraqi torture, I didn't see you jumping to the "Hey, wait a minute, that's ignorant" conclusion. You were too busy pissing your pants over someone else's sadness. So please, get off your high horse before you fall off.

As for the Britney comment, I'm sure you'll all get over it. Phish "the music" will likely be far less important historically than Phish "the phenomenon", yet most of the haters here betray a fundemental lack of understanding of the latter because of their bias against the former.

I think the levels of hatred aimed at Phish and their "anti-corporate" ilk is more to do with the rampant delusion of their fanbase that they are somehow above Britney, Nsync and almost every other recording artist because they have a less obvious marketing department.

Less obvious? Most fans not only know that Dionysian Productions is their marketing department, but that the head of Phish marketing, Amy Skelton was one of their first fans. In fact, most of the people "behind the scenes" were at some point initially fans -- the soundboard guy, the lighting guy, the archivist... this band was made up of its fans in more ways than one.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 3:51 AM on May 26, 2004


Phish "the music" will likely be far less important historically than Phish "the phenomenon", yet most of the haters here betray a fundemental lack of understanding of the latter because of their bias against the former.

I think it's exactly the other way around. People love to hate the cliche hippie they've constructed in their heads, and that's why they won't give the music a chance. If they approached it with an open mind, they might be surprised by what they hear.
posted by muckster at 5:42 AM on May 26, 2004


I thought they already broke up once in the late 90s.

PS: I used to really like Phish a lot (a lot more than I generally want to admit, actually) but starting with Rift (I think "Fast Enough for You" is one of the cheesiest songs in the entire universe, and I get that same angry feeling in the pit up my stomach when I hear it as I do when I listen to Michael Bolton, and don't even get me started on "Sample in a Jar"), I felt like their new stuff went downhill fast. I stopped liking their new songs and felt like a chump going to shows in the hope they'd only play old songs, and then I just lost interest in the whole scene (I got into the scene because I liked their music, incidentally, not the other way around), and then I lost track of Phish completely. And then I got this kind of angry anti-nostalgia for that time period in my life.

But during moments of unclouded rationality, I can admit that Phish sure did make the years of 1990-1996-ish a lot of fun for me, so I have a lot of sympathy for the current fans. Sorry for your loss, kids.
posted by jennyb at 9:34 AM on May 26, 2004


This was the band that made the most consistently interesting and adventurous rock music to come out of the US for the last ten years

Phish are a decent jam band, but not even close. How about the Bottle Rockets, Wilco, Nile, Monster Magnet, The Muffs, Beck, The Fastbacks, The Mighty Mighty Bosstones, Jason & The Scorchers, all of whom leave Phish in the dust and that's just what I can think off of the top of my head, and this is coming from someone who almost never listens to new music.
posted by jonmc at 9:46 AM on May 26, 2004


I was wondering why when I woke up this morning, the colors all seemed so dim.

[might've been the heavy fog too ;)]

I can imagine generations to come holding on this day, all colors and creeds asking one another... "where were you on that May 25th?" When suddenly society took on a darker note, heralding in a new age of sorrow and war?

Truly... this, alongside Good Friday, will be remembered as the day happiness took its final breath - and gave way to a very dark and frightening Age of Aquarius, where we know, we Know, that we can never be innocent, or even fully happy, again.

Remember to donate to your local hospitals, folks. I bet they're already overburdened with suicide attempts. And keep up your plywood stock, just in case.
posted by abcde at 10:22 AM on May 26, 2004


Phish are a decent jam band, but not even close. How about the Bottle Rockets, Wilco, Nile, Monster Magnet, The Muffs, Beck, The Fastbacks, The Mighty Mighty Bosstones, Jason & The Scorchers, all of whom leave Phish in the dust and that's just what I can think off of the top of my head, and this is coming from someone who almost never listens to new music.

I wouldn't consider '94-'04 to be the "peak" of Phish's performances (maybe 89-95 imo, but still with good shows since them). But Phish has always been very musically adventurous and trying out new things.

I've never listened to The Bottle Rockets, Nile, The Muffs, The Fastbacks, or Jason and the Scorchers. So I won't comment on them.

Wilco - a band I like, but Phish definitely has done a lot more musical exploration/experimenting than Wilco.

Monster Magnet - another band I like, but I wouldn't even consider them the most interesting, adventurous out of the Metal/Stoner rock genre. (Kyuss would be a better example, but they broke up in '95-'96)

Beck - a good call, no complaints

The Mighty Mighty Bosstones - once again, a band I like. But what is musically adventurous about the Bosstones? They play Ska, they play punk, they rock out a bit, then they play some more Ska.
posted by stifford at 10:31 AM on May 26, 2004


Phish definitely has done a lot more musical exploration/experimenting than Wilco.

Exploration is not the be-all and end-all especially in rock and roll where hewing to certain cardinal virtues is important. You can explore a parking lot, but if there's nothing there it's still kind of boring. In essence, the tension created by experimenting within the limits of the form is where the best rock is created, IMHO.

I was mainly picking bands off the top of my head who I considered superior to Phish. This is not to say Phish is without merit, they're enjoyable enough, although I'm not much of a jam guy. Even in that category, I'd give the nod to Medeski, Martin & Wood, North Mississippi All-Stars or the String Cheese Incident. and Primus.

I've never listened to The Bottle Rockets, Nile, The Muffs, The Fastbacks, or Jason and the Scorchers. So I won't comment on them.

Bottle Rockets, Nile, The Muffs, The Fastbacks, Jason & The Scorchers. In case you were wondering.
posted by jonmc at 11:07 AM on May 26, 2004


Exploration is not the be-all and end-all

I wasn't saying that it was. My comment was based on the quote you had highlighted from another post ("This was the band that made the most consistently interesting and adventurous rock music to come out of the US for the last ten years"). As far as being interesting and adventurous, I'd still put Phish ahead of the bands I commented on (not Beck necessarily). Just because a band experiments more musically and/or stylistically than another band doesn't make them "better". But I would say it makes them more "adventurous".
posted by stifford at 11:31 AM on May 26, 2004


If anyone is interested, Trey will be on Charlie Rose tonight.
posted by alphanerd at 2:44 PM on May 26, 2004


Rift is probably in my top twenty favorite albums (up there with Flood, Bela Fleck's Live Art, and the White Album), and I have never touched cannabis in my life. Thanks for the music, guys.
posted by darukaru at 4:27 PM on May 26, 2004


« Older Michael Moore will release Fahrenheit 9/11 via...   |   Phish calls it quits? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments