Battle of the Bands -- Round 2, Battle 8

[ChrisWins]

Are we seriousy suggesting that Phish are better musicians than Radiohead just because they like to jam?

It's not about liking to jam, it's about the quality of said jamming. Studio work, in my opinion, means nothing if you can't back it up on stage. Am I wrong? No. It's my opinion, yours may be different.

Okay, so maybe Radiohead can duplicate their studio work in a live show setting. But can Radiohead go beyond that on stage by such immeasurable leaps and bounds as Phish does? The same thing with the Grateful Dead as Phish, almost... their studio albums are okay to listen, not horrible, but when they get on stage it's there that their musical ability is put into the truest limelight. Those two bands experienced live have given more people musical ecstasy than anyone has a right to. It's truly not easy to put into words. Jamming isn't just jamming. I guess it can be but the GD and Phish didn't "just jam" they created masterpieces of music written for the very first time right there on the spot. The next night they don't go and replay those jams and then replay them again the next night and all tour long. It's a constantly changing masterpiece. It's not always perfect, some nights maybe one guy or two is off, or just not into, but those nights often the others can at least partially make up for it. But then there are the nights when you can literally feel in the music that they're all there, 110% they're painting musically some of the most incredible mind-blowing works of art ever created. Bands like Radiohead on stage - what do they do? Play their studio work somewhat similar to how it is on CD but it's in a live setting. I'm not saying that's a bad thing... but how much extra goes into it? Has Radiohead turned a 3 and a half minute studio version into an 18 and a half minute masterpiece where at the end the entire crowd figuratively collapses because they're so blown away by what they just heard?

Jamming isn't just jamming for some bands like Phish. It's truly some of the most incredible musical art ever created.

​

 

[ps139]

But then there are the nights when you can literally feel in the music that they're all there, 110% they're painting musically some of the most incredible mind-blowing works of art ever created.

Chris, I have experienced this, I can still remember the images the music made in my head, yes it is ecstasy - "ex-stasis" - you experience things out of your normal "state" (and I aint talking New Jersey!) something that I've only found music,love and the Holy Spirit be able to do to me.
I am glad I found you on some other part of the forum, you can describe these things so well!!

 

[ps139]

Well then what in the world have you been talking about this whole thread?

This is the great thing about the tingly feeling: it needs no justification. Why are you trying to justify it?

How am I trying to justify it? I don't get it. I'm just saying Phish is better!

Err....Radiohead's 4th studio album.

Andy what did you mean before when you asked if Phish can do something like Kid A? If they can have as good an album? I suggest you pick up A Live One, Billy Breathes, Junta, or Live Phish 12.

 

[musicPhan#41]

It's not about liking to jam, it's about the quality of said jamming. Studio work, in my opinion, means nothing if you can't back it up on stage. Am I wrong? No. It's my opinion, yours may be different.

Okay, so maybe Radiohead can duplicate their studio work in a live show setting. But can Radiohead go beyond that on stage by such immeasurable leaps and bounds as Phish does? The same thing with the Grateful Dead as Phish, almost... their studio albums are okay to listen, not horrible, but when they get on stage it's there that their musical ability is put into the truest limelight. Those two bands experienced live have given more people musical ecstasy than anyone has a right to. It's truly not easy to put into words. Jamming isn't just jamming. I guess it can be but the GD and Phish didn't "just jam" they created masterpieces of music written for the very first time right there on the spot. The next night they don't go and replay those jams and then replay them again the next night and all tour long. It's a constantly changing masterpiece. It's not always perfect, some nights maybe one guy or two is off, or just not into, but those nights often the others can at least partially make up for it. But then there are the nights when you can literally feel in the music that they're all there, 110% they're painting musically some of the most incredible mind-blowing works of art ever created. Bands like Radiohead on stage - what do they do? Play their studio work somewhat similar to how it is on CD but it's in a live setting. I'm not saying that's a bad thing... but how much extra goes into it? Has Radiohead turned a 3 and a half minute studio version into an 18 and a half minute masterpiece where at the end the entire crowd figuratively collapses because they're so blown away by what they just heard?

Jamming isn't just jamming for some bands like Phish. It's truly some of the most incredible musical art ever created.

​

i agree.


page (phish's keyboardist) talks about jamming on the IT dvd. he talks about how sometimes when they're jamming, if they keep perservering through the first 15 minutes of the jam, they'll eventually come to really high moments, where the musical levels of creativity are incredible.

until you start listening to jam-music, you can't really understand how "jamming" can be such an amazing form of musical communication.

 

[mariusx1]

Radiohead...I think they're clearly the more original band. Not that Phish is bad, but they've kinda been done before (Grateful Dead)

 

[theFijian]

Andy what did you mean before when you asked if Phish can do something like Kid A?

If you listen to The Bends and OK Computer then listen to Kid A there is a marked shift in sound and style. I guess what I'm asking is have Phish ever tried to almost completely ditch the sound that defined them and made them so popular for another sound so different as to run the risk of alienating a large proportion of their fans, all in the name of their creative integrity?

 

[musicPhan#41]

If you listen to The Bends and OK Computer then listen to Kid A there is a marked shift in sound and style. I guess what I'm asking is have Phish ever tried to almost completely ditch the sound that defined them and made them so popular for another sound so different as to run the risk of alienating a large proportion of their fans, all in the name of their creative integrity?

yes.

they have put out a few albums that were a big departure from their "norm".

but then again, phish is always doing that, so they don't really have a "norm".

 

[ps139]

yes.

they have put out a few albums that were a big departure from their "norm".

but then again, phish is always doing that, so they don't really have a "norm".

I second that.
Each album has a different sound to it. Also If you listen to a live show from 89, from 93, from 96, from 99, from 03... they are all different. It is great to listen to your favorite songs played differently each time. They went through periods where they would be really funky, to more bluegrassy, to Latin, to being real spacey and electronic to including horns in the tours... all kinds of stuff.

Radiohead...I think they're clearly the more original band. Not that Phish is bad, but they've kinda been done before (Grateful Dead)

No offense marius, but that is an ignorant comment. GD certainly paved the way for long experimental and improv jams, but just listen to the 2 bands, they have SUCH a different sound and their songs are just so different, I can't emphasize that enough. What they do to the songs is similar, but thats it.

 

[zaire]

Gotta be Radiohead. Ive got 3 of there albums and they are all very different and all are brilliant.
Also the song Fake Plastic Trees cracks me up its so good.