Permalink for Comment #1345645063 by ColForbin

, comment by ColForbin
ColForbin @TheLizard said:
That may be true, but I listened to the recording of sunday night's show last night, and if you weren't there you would not have known that they didn't include in the recording how Trey was playing Eleanore Rigby teases before they threw down Crosseyed and Painless. Or how Trey had just put down his guitar during yem and started getting down while Mike laid out his unexpected barrage of bass bombs and funky slapping with a huge smile on his face. Saying you don't have to be at a show to review it is like saying you don't have to have eaten an entire bowl of Capt'n Crunch in order to write a review on it. Just a taste of one piece would be sufficient. Without eating a whole serving, you wouldn't know that after a few minutes, when the milk just starts soaking in, the cereal starts to cut the roof of your mouth. Or the gritty feeling it leaves on your teeth after you finish the bowl. You may have gotten a taste of the show by listening to it on your computer, but you would not know the gravity of Mike's thunderous bass bombs. Or appreciate the look on the band's faces when they are fully immersed in a particularly outstanding jam. A huge part of the show is the energy that the band exudes while playing to all it's adoring fans. Isn't that one of the reason we try so hard to get into the show itself. Or how good the acoustics of the venue were. You may listen to the soundtrack of a movie, but without seeing the film, you can not make an accurate review. I can't tell you how many times I have left a show with me and many of the other show goes feeling that the show was absolutely stellar, only to read a review back at the hotel that the show had been lack-luster or just average. I know, to many people, the drugs they took can play a large part in swaying this perception, but as I attend the shows fully sober, I am not influenced by those things. The overwhelming truth is that the quality of a show can only be accurately depicted by someone who was in attendance. And when I haven't attended the show, they are the only opinions I can fully trust.
This is a great argument for the other side, and I do appreciate the "I was there" details like what the venue was like, what the band was wearing, whether there were any funny dance moves, even setbreak music. When I wrote reviews for shows back on r.m.p. I included that kind of stuff, and I think people enjoyed reading it (go ahead and click on my name, they are all here). All things being equal, I think the staff here would like to have every recap done by someone in attendance, but it isn't always possible to do so in a timely manner (and recaps that are even delayed by a day see far less traffic and commenting activity).

But unfortunately, no one who logs on to Phish.net who didn't attend the show can ever attend the show. What they can do is listen to the show - so our reviews try to cater to those people, because for any given show there are thousands more Phish fans and .netters who weren't there than those who were.

Al that said, for every setlist in our database there is an opportunity to review the show, and for most recent shows there are plenty of personal experience style reviews to check out. I encourage everyone to post reviews if that is their thing, and thumbs up the ones they like even if they don't post.


Phish.net

Phish.net is a non-commercial project run by Phish fans and for Phish fans under the auspices of the all-volunteer, non-profit Mockingbird Foundation.

This project serves to compile, preserve, and protect encyclopedic information about Phish and their music.

Credits | Terms Of Use | Legal | DMCA

© 1990-2024  The Mockingbird Foundation, Inc.