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
The Mockingbird Foundation is a non-profit organization founded by Phish fans in 1996 to generate charitable proceeds from the Phish community.
And since we're entirely volunteer – with no office, salaries, or paid staff – administrative costs are less than 2% of revenues! So far, we've distributed over $2 million to support music education for children – hundreds of grants in all 50 states, with more on the way.
But I enjoyed the performances, in the context that it was the end. I thought some of the improv was spectacular, and the flubs were understandable. But I'd already let go of Phish in October 2000. In many ways, when they came back in 09, it was - to me - a continuation, styllistically and aesthetically - of where they left off in 2000 - developing song-based jamming, varied setlists etc.
No I don't claim there were no good shows in 2.0 - in fact there were, and some incredibly good songwriting (I'd even call Round Room their most fully realized studio record, and Victor Disc a legend). But it set in motion a pattern in which shows are now judged - even in 3.0 by jam lengths, not by quality. A good show to a lot of the newer Phish blogs and websites is average but with a 20 min. DWD/Light/ etc. So Phish are not recieving feedback about how to play all-around good shows, and when they do, the newish school kids complain (i.e. Outside Lands)..