^ I knew that was coming…Look at the demographics. You can’t compare apples to oranges.
Okay.
^ Ha
I’m just saying look at the Phish community. You’d say that for the most part the fan base is in tune with good music. At least we’d like to think so. Who has the most appeal strictly in our community: TAB or MGB?
You gotta say TAB. Doesn’t our fan base pride itself on knowlede of music and good musicianship. The majority favor TAB. To me that speaks volumes.
^ Dude Anastasio/Marshall wrote Icc 
^ Thanks for dropping the knowledge…Does’t that work as a double meaning though?
^^^Yeah the average Phish fan has complete musical discernment about what’s quality. 
Disagree. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard fans say that the two chord funk part of YEM is where it REALLY gets good. Or any number of other observations that reveal ignorance to the mechanics of music. Someone said recently how “Moma Dance” is no good until it’s at least 8:00 minutes long.
Sure, Phish draws real music fans, who really know music theory n’ play instruments n’ such. But not much more than any other decent band. Lots of musicians are turned off by some of the idiots that follow Phish!
So, they get their share of casual music fans, especially SINCE the early nineties, when their fame really took off and roped in LOTS of casual fans.
Why am I still posting in this thread??!!!
::sets fire to self::
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree fellas.
I’ll Push On Til The Day and you can Dig Further Down.
I said 
I just set myself on fire.
Jesus, what does it take to entertain you?
Andelman’s Yard.
Play it with your mouth, monkey boy.
Extinguishes Kevin and hands him a fatty
Here man, light this
I would say it is pretty easy to say Mike is much, much more diverse a musician.
I like Trey, too!
I consider Trey a name. He’s considered the front man of Phish for all intensive purposes. People who see Phish just to see Phish don’t Mike outside of Phish, but they know Trey.
I would also venture to say playing with Dave Matthews had to help with his general popularity where Mike chose to go, shall we say, a different route.
Also, since Trey sings most of their catalogue, a lot of people probably figured they were most likely to get their Phish fix (during the hiatus) from Trey.
IMO, these are why Trey gets more people at his shows. Not because he’s better than Mike and I cannot be convinced otherwise.
Mike is more versitile than Trey. Look at each project he’s done from whimsical acoustic with Leo, the jammy jazz with the Duo, Rythym Devils with Mickey and Kruetzman, and his honkey tonk band Ramble Dove. Each one is new, fresh, differen. Trey’s projects are all just slightly different versions of eachother and, IMO amount to “Phish Lite”.
I consider Trey like a one trick pony. He’s great at what he does, but he doesn’t venture out from that too often except for the orchaestra thing which I thought was way cool. Maybe Trey is capable of more, but damn if he takes any chances to try something different and that’s why my vote will always go to Mike.
I’d agree w/Ollie (especially about why Trey solo is more successful), except that Trey IS incredibly versatile. Granted he’s on a narrower focus kick at the moment.
I do think Trey is somewhat “better” a musician than Mike, incidentally … but not across the board. And certainly concert draw is no measure of musical superiority! And: I don’t know how much I myself get behind that statement. The four members of Phish are so accomplished that it’s silly to make any such claim, even for the band members themselves, I’m sure.
Mike in recent years has been more artsy about it, which I personally prefer. But don’t forget, Trey’s the guy responsible for “Col. Forbin’s > Mockingbird”, “Esther”, “YEM”, “Foam”, “The Divided Sky”, “Lizards”, … there’s some real diversity and true unique genius in those works IMO; more than you see in … I dunno, almost every songwriter ever.
Besides the argument of who is more versatile, it’s a damned good thing these musicians ended up playing together. They obviously reached heights that probably none of them could have reached by themselves.
This is a key point and a point that bothers Mike. He’s said it in interviews that he wants to be known for what he has done on his own not to be simply known as the bassist for Phish. That’s why you won’t see any of Mike’s song from The Green Sparrow really make the Phish rotation. I don’t think he wants them too. Those are his songs. Mike is in Phish, but MGB is Mike’s passion now.
I dunno, Kevin. I still question Trey’s versatility. I think Trey may have more musical genius than Mike, but for whatever reason, he’s chosen not to employ it for quite a while now.
I see completely what you’re saying Tad, and am a HUGE fan of Mike’s solo material, but I think that his general approach to his solo band is just different. It’s like ying and yang; with Phish he can lay back more and and bop his head and let the others do their thing while being able to put in his share of inspired improvisation. With his other band he’s able to write all the material and be the lead singer and pretty much express himself in a way which he can’t in Phish.
All I’m saying is that I doubt Mike lets his passion for solo band make him less inspired about Phish. On the contrary; I think he’s very glad to be able to have two fantastic projects going on in which his role differs so much
This statement actually sums up my entire frustration/complaint.
I sometimes wonder if he’s just plain received too much criticism of his Greatest Works, and everything for the last 18 years has been in direct contrast to that stuff. Opposite approach, total rebellion against himself. Somethin. I dunno. That’s why we have these discussions.
Interesting.
I wonder where that leaves us when his last attempt at a composed “orchestra” piece essentially saw flocks of fans head straight to the pissa in disapproval?
Perhaps collaborating with this country chick.