Eidt: You didn't compare those songs I mentioned.... You just said you 'got it;' that's what piqued my interest -

@n00b100 said:

@raidcehlalred said:

I could be totally alone here, and that's fine. To the contributors, both staff and mega-fans, I totally respect your opinions. (Especially to you all writing here.) But I've always found the type-II designation sort of pedantic and embarrassing. I was born after the Dead were playing their coolest music, but I started seeing Phish when they began creating theirs; and I never heard of the designation until - I don't know even know when. So there is that.

But say one wants to use that argument here (that 'They've gone type-II;' it's strange to type). Well that doesn't add up.

Because from at 24.00 (above) through Trey at 25.20 or whatever.... He's totally reentered Tweezer - using effects to 'echo' the riff, no less. And Mike is totally with him. The band is clearly back in Tweezer. Type-II playing (or jamming) has nothing to do with it, as they are clearly within the confines of a recognizable song structure.

That there are many legendary Tweezers has nothing to do with it either (I say this since 'logic' was mentioned / that position has no basis in logic).

And I'll read anything anyone wants to post about cool jams and how they should be labeled; but using another show as 'evidence' doesn't hold up either.

The band leaves Tweezer for Caspian. And they leave Caspian for Tweezer (with Trey, before, and quite near those major bass bombs, flirting heavily with Reprise - Page too). They simply decide to shred, instead, inside the easily recognized confines of a song structure.

And we know what song that is.

Practically this entire post is in reply to what I wrote. Gotta hit that "reply" button, man.

1. I kinda find the whole "Type II" thing embarrassing too, mainly b/c it leads to a lot of "h3tty jams uber alles" fans that can miss the forest for the trees, but that's not really why I brought it up. I brought it up because @GUMBY's corollary arguments w/r/t Mike and Page playing Tweezer are irrelevant. The band, itself, was in a jam that was neither Caspian NOR Tweezer at that point. You're telling me that hose jam at the end of Caspian is "clearly within the confines of a recognizable song structure" of ANY song Phish has wrote? I gotta hear this song, it rules!

2. The position that you state isn't based in logic wasn't meant to be; it was meant to be a droll throwaway closing sentence. It wouldn't affect my life very much at all if Caspian had this jam "taken away from it". I'll note that the position I DID invoke logic over was not rebutted at all in your reply.

3. The reason to bring up other shows as "evidence" is because a) there is precedent for Tweezer sandwiches, lots and lots of it, and b) it's worth noting how the setlist team dealt with that precedent in the past. It's human beings that make the .net setlists. They're not just handed down from on high (far from it, actually).

4. One last thing - you ever buy shows from LivePhish.com? Whenever there's a Tweezer sandwich, they will *always* create a new track for the second Tweezer, because they, too, have had to deal with Tweezer sandwiches before. 2/20/93. Bomb Factory. 12/14/95 (as noted above). 7/27/14. 8/15/15. Every last one of them accounts for a second Tweezer when there's a second Tweezer track to be made.

Magnaball Tweezer -> Caspian? No second Tweezer track. Maybe .net's team aren't the only people we should be taking this up with?