I am actually surprised more that there is such a debate about this, but, perhaps I shouldn't be since there seems to most often be a debate about most things Phish. The separation appears to mostly be a more philosophical debate in which one asks "Can you separate the music from the experience?" I would say that the answer is a resounding yes and that is one of the POINTS of the recap.

We all know that a live Phish concert is a blend of music and experience. Hell, there have been shows that have been such an experience just GETTING there that by the time they hit the first not I had almost forgotten that at the end of all that Phish was actually going to play. I don't think that in any way, recapping the previous nights music in any way detracts from any experience a person had at a show.

This seems to go back to a never ending debate between why people go: Personal or Precise. Precise people want eloquent, articulate jams with a well constructed set list and personal want loose, happy, joking around Phish. Rarely are both in the same show. Is it hard to capture the energy when you are not there, especially of a more "personal" show? Of course! Are there moments at shows and at times entire shows that you had to be there to really get it? Of course! That's what makes Phish who they are.

However, from a "precise" view point, can you evaluate the energy delivered in an individual song without commenting on the energy of the crowd? Absolutely. Can you evaluate the music itself without the experience? Certainly. I would simply expect that those reading the recaps take them for what they are, evaluations of a show and/or it's music based on how the blogger experienced the show. Read. Agree. Disagree. Move in.

Thanks Phish.net you do a fantastic job with this site and thanks to everyone who loves Phish for being precise, personal, or both.