@mgouker said:

Cal Expo is the lowest ranked at:
9/27 Cal Expo 4.2 7 1.5
Assuming there is merit in comparing shows from different eras (which I would argue against). Do you *really* believe that this show is less entertaining than that show? I do not, FWIW. The 3rd night of Bethel is a typically solid Phish 3.0 show and blows 9/27/95 out of the water. ;=)

Wait wait wait WAIT, Michael. First, the number has little to do with how "entertaining" a show is. A crappy show musically might still be enormously entertaining overall. Every Phish show is "entertaining" to me -- that is why I listen to all of them. The point of the rating/number is simply for those who appreciate the rating to have some sense of the reviewer's take on the show. If you don't agree with its use, then don't use it.

I was at the Cal Expo show in 1995 and it was one of the weakest Phish shows I've ever attended. Or heard. Based on what I've heard of the Bethel shows, each is more musically superior overall to that Cal Expo show. Is it fair to compare them? Well, they're Phish shows after all. Comparing Phish shows from various eras with eachother makes at least some sense to me, and I enjoy doing it and will continue to do it. I also sincerely believe that if one analyzes, say, every version of Mike's Groove, Tweezer and YEM ever performed, s/he will see that it makes sense to compare versions across time, if only to see not only how the improvisation changes from time to time -- but also how similar it may be. The 6/7/09 Camden Tweezer could fit right in to 1992-1994, for example. It's very "old school" sounding.

In any event, maybe I am misinterpreting you. Bottom line is that if someone thinks the rating is crap, then disregard it. There will ALWAYS be fans who disagree with any rating. There will ALWAYS be fans who view the show they just saw as better than "average-great." A lot of people just don't want to hear that anyone thinks the show they just saw was "typical" or "average" for a Phish show or, God forbid, below-average (GASP).

Of course, in an age when obtaining copies of shows to listen to is far, far easier for fans than it was when the rating system was created, it's utility is reasonably questioned. Some fans used to use ratings as a guide to whether they should marshall their resources to send blanks and return postage to obtain a copy. But I still find the rating system worth using, and entertaining, if only to inspire people to chime in thoughtfully about the music.