this was a reply from a friend of mine....
As far as "comparisons", they can be silly and futile but its human to do so. This particular piece sound's intelligent but behind the cosmetic literacy of the writing, there's so much underlying ignorance, particularly with regard to the Dead's side of the discussion, that its really a silly premise.
First, the most important thing about any song-based music endeavor is, well, the songs! I don't begrudge Phish or their fans anything. They are authentic and have more artistic integrity than almost any band on the scene today - if that wasn't the case they wouldn't have such a loyal and enduring fan base.
However, the biggest and most important difference between them and the GD, before you get to the altogether flawed "technical analysis" offered here, is that the GD have one of the greatest books of original songs in pop-rock history. On the other hand, Phish doesn't have a single great song - not one classic like Friend Of The Devil, Jack Straw, Eyes, Casey Jones, Touch Of Gray, Truckin and on and on. The Dead wrote 90% of their material between 1967 and 1987 - 20 years. Phish has been in its prime that long now and even I, who have seen them live and know them better than 99% of music fans who are not Phish "heads", can't name one Phish tune that has any of the elements of a classic SONG. You can end the comparison right there.
But lets go on, since the writer bases his argument on other, ostensibly more convenient, basis of what he considers given facts:
First of all, The Dead INVENTED the musical approach that Phish, admittedly in their own stylistic manner, adopted for their band. They would be the first to admit this and indeed they have. This is important on its face. As Dizzy Gillespie said about Louis Armstrong, "No him, no me".
Second, I don't know where this guy got whatever musical training he pretends to have, but he shows his ignorance all over this peice. I won't go into everything, but his lack of understanding of Weir & Lesh's talents as compared to Garcia's are astonishing, particularly given, for example, Mike Gordon's humble attitude about his mentor, the master Lesh. You would never see, say, a Branford Marsalis get onstage with Mike Gordon for example but for the writer to even make the initial remark makes that point a waste of time. Same with Weir - indeed, one of my frustrations with Deadheads is their general lack of appreciation for Weir's musicianship which, in its own way, is the modest equal of Garcia's and Jerry himself would be the first to say so and often did. Meanwhile, perhaps the most revealing comment in this regard was the shallow and ridiculous opinion that the lightweight keyboardist Bruce Hornsby, who doesn't cut it as a jazz guy OR a rock guy - he's basically one of those "pop-jazz" cats who did well to even associate himself with the Dead - is the only one who could, what did he say? "follow" Garcia, as if that's the idea... If this writer ever listened to Keith Godchaux with the Dead, their keyboardist during most of their best performance years, he obviously doesn't know enough about music history to understand the depth of Keith's sophistication and overall talent.
Third, as far as the whole point about arranging and musical structure, again - the song's the thing. The extent of Phish's technical sophistication, like the "prog" bands of the 70's like Yes, are for the most part gratuitous. Complicated for complicated's sake. When the Dead wrote in odd time signatures, they did it because they knew how to genuinely SWING in that realm. They never wrote ANYTHING for the sake of showing off, although they did write some of the most ambitious music of their time.
Fourth, and last for now, is a point that drives me crazy - that Phish has a "sense of humor" that the Dead somehow lack. What Phish lyrics are is plain silly, I don't care how obscure their references might be. Aside from Bob Hunter's wry sense of humor (he's the ONLY lyricist who Bob Dylan, the most underrated humorist in American poetry covered), the Dead could make you laugh out loud with actual, subtle, shadings in their music. Trey is a great guitarist and Phish are formidable musicians, but the personality behind the technicians doesn't have a fraction of the depth of Garcia and the rest of the Dead. I could site examples from here to Timbuktu but I don't have the time nor the inclination as the very fact that this goes so far over this guys head makes it altogether superfluous.
Phish is no doubt an excellent band whether they're my taste or not. They are righteous, adventurous and have been able to carve out a giant following by going way outside of the music industry (for which they of course credit the genius of the Grateful dead for inventing that very model). Nevertheless, The Grateful Dead, more and more (as is usually the case with great art) are deservedly getting their due as one of the greatest artists of the 20th century - on the same level as The Beatles, Picasso, Hemingway, Miles Davis, Bartok, Hitchcock and the other great artistic masters who's art already has and will continue to stand the test of time - that is, to be utterly timeless.