This post is about the band from Vermont not the malevolent internet activity. And for the record the band started using the name around 1983 more than a decade before the sneaky internet folks did around 1996.
Anyway, I have been a fan of Phish's music since the early nineties. From the moment I heard the song Rift from the album Rift on a mix tape I was given I was hooked. After hearing that I first felt compelled to buy the album itself, which is one of the most magical, unified, and virtuosic listening experiences you will find anywhere. Then, luckily for me, there was a mail-order form in the album booklet to get their first two albums Junta and Lawnboy. I promptly filled it out and sent it in.
The following year - having been fully primed on Junta, Lawnboy, and Rift - I inherited a used copy of their third album A Picture of Nectar from a friend who didn't like it because to him they just sounded like a barbershop quartet. Now I don't particularly like barbershop quartets, but in the world of Phish it is just one more musical style to be learned, experimented with, and expertly incorporated. A Picture of Nectar turned out to be a cornucopia of musical experimentation: rock, country, jazz, Latin, barbershop, you name it, it's all there. Not long after that they released their fifth album Hoist, their most rocking album, with hints of funk, bluegrass, and a ballad thrown in for good measure. As the author of "Phish: The Biography" Parke Puterbaugh noted, Phish are "musical omnivores".
At this point I have been listening to these albums on and off for over twenty years. They get better with every listen. But I didn't mean to delve so longwindedly into the history of how I got into the music of Phish. It turns out though that the preceding two paragraphs will help to illustrate my point in writing this post in the first place: notice that nowhere above did I say anything about drugs, live shows, or Grateful Dead.
By far the most common thing I am asked when someone finds out that I like Phish is "Do you like Grateful Dead?" Nope, not really. To me the two bands sound nothing alike, and it seems very strange that they are lumped together so often just because they play longer songs than normal or because some Deadheads became Phishheads after Jerry died. No bad blood toward the Dead or anything. It's awesome that they were able to rock out and tour for like three decades with a cadre of dedicated fans. But their music barely moves me at all when I hear it. If Truckin' or Touch of Grey comes on the radio I won't turn it off, but I won't run out to buy the singles either. Anyway, that Phish and Grateful Dead sound alike or should be grouped into the same musical category is hands-down false to my ears. I say that on the authority of my subjectivity, because the enjoyment of music is completely subjective. Of course that implies you may categorize them as you like. All I'm saying is to give both bands a listen before you lump them together, you might find them to be as drastically different as I do.
Onto the second myth: Phish only sounds good if you are on drugs. This is total BS. I have never listened to Phish on drugs and they have always sounded utterly amazing to me. More than any other band they have taken virtually uncountable styles of music and melded them into their own unique, breathtakingly tight, and cohesive sound. Also I feel that they are the undisputed masters of the "band solo". If you've never heard that term before here's a sketch. Do you know how when you're watching a band live and the members settle into a highly repetitious groove so that the guitarist can play by himself in the spotlight for a while? That is an ordinary solo. Sometimes bands will even take turns doing ordinary soloing: the guitarist will solo, then the bassist, then the drummer, etc. The band solo is a completely different beast from that because there is no spotlight, the entire band goes to new musical places together. To hear the soundscapes and atmospheres shift so fluidly and systematically in songs like "Reba" or "It's Ice" almost feels like becoming a cog in a cosmic music machine. But only if you are listening closely. I can't imagine trying to grasp the multitude of virtuosic detail while under the influence of some sense-altering chemical. No thanks. Phish's music is sense-altering enough. It needs no help.
And now onto the third and final myth for today: Phish only sounds good live. Again, total BS. Phish's studio albums brought me countless hours of listening enjoyment for seven years before I ever saw one of their shows. The show was great! Totally awesome. The way they were able to manipulate the energy level of the entire arena so gradually almost without notice, was amazing. I remember at one point I was just relaxed and watching Page play his grand piano and a few minutes later I was nearly jumping up and down without realizing it, because the band had increased the energy seemingly in secret, with all of us watching . . . I am not saying they don't sound good live, I am saying they don't only sound good live. To me they sound just as amazing on their records. And while it is true that their songs oftentimes get injected with new life and fresh energy when played live, somehow they've also managed to capture their spirit of exploration and improvisation on the albums too. There are times when listening to their recordings when I feel like the train is about to go off the tracks (for example in the crescendo of Maze) but somehow the control is always reacquired. It's hard to believe that they are able to manage such convincing wildness in the studio. Anyway, see them live? Of course! But also listen to their albums. If not you will be missing out.
I recommend you start with Rift
[in headphones if possible for the full effect].
