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.
Please let me correct you, however, about your GD history, if you're willing to listen. I am a huge fan of the band, and I have a ridiculously massive collection of SDB's of their shows, from '66 to '93, (never bothered with 94-95). The band did not, as you say, have several "peaks". There were several periods in which their music is considered better than in others, yes, but those are not "peaks." The GD peaked in the summer of 1972, after their European tour, as they toured the west coast. When Pigpen got very sick and then died, it derailed their momentum. '73 is considered by many to be their best year (myself included), but as '74 approached, their shows were becoming increasingly unfocused and uncohesive. Then they took time off. When they came back, refreshed, they were focused and the next 18 months was another period of great music (the '77 "peak" you referenced). Towards the end of this run, however, you could hear the rot starting to set in, as Jerry (and others in the band) began doing massive quantities of cocaine, and Keith Godchaux was falling to pieces. '78 saw lots of inconsistent playing. They were still hot, but were having quite a few off nights. By '80, Jerry was now dabbling in heroine and was letting himself go to complete shit. (Check out photos of him from '77, then '80, then '85. It's pretty scary.) His singing and playing went consistently downhill (as did the band's). There was a bump in energy for a year or so with the arrival of Brent (and departure of Donna), but then (due in no small part to Brent Mydland, who was a self-destructive party animal), Jerry started to completely fall apart. Do you remember the diabetic coma? Remember the bumper stickers "the Fat Man Melts" ? We were hoping and praying he'd turn it around. He did for a short time, resulting in a rennaissance between '87-89. DON'T call this a "peak". It was simply a brief return to professionalism and consciousness. By '91 he was a complete train wreck and they should have stopped touring (like Phish did when Trey was struggling). Don't speak to me of all the intense concerts from '80 on. I know what you're talking about. I followed them up and down the East Coast in the '80's, and I'm not speaking out of my ass.
Phish is so much better, so much more talented and so much more professional than the Dead ever were it's not funny. The Dead limped home (because of Jerry) while Phish is picking up steam (though it remains to be seen how they finish).
Anyway, I apologize for ranting on so long, but there's a lot of people who spout out the "conventional wisdom" on the Dead and it just isn't true. In that vein, you were right to say it is the same today, regarding phans' opinions and the "noobs", "vets" angle.
Please don't take offense, I know you're a veteran fan of the GD and I'm sure you know all this, but just maybe not from that perspective.
By the way, I'm not 60. Like I said before, I'm just under 50 and started going to Dead shows in '81. If that makes me unqualified to comment on their music before that period (which I own thousands of hours of), then that's pretty sad, and says a lot about the division we have in the Phish community.
Let's keep it real.