Holly Bowling loves Phish. It’s her devotion to the Vermont quartet that inspired the classically-trained pianist to transcribe and record Phish songs, both live and studio versions, for her new album Distillation of a Dream: The Music of Phish Reimagined for Solo Piano. Bowling took time away from her current tour to speak with us about the challenges of the recording, the inimitability that is Phish, and that now-legendary jam in Nevada that sparked this unique project.
Where did the idea come from to transcribe and record Phish songs for solo piano?
It was something that grew organically out of my experiences up until this point. I’ve played classical piano for years and years, and I’ve seen a lot of Phish shows. Those two things just kind of came together.
What was the first piece you tackled?
It started with the Tahoe “Tweezer,” which is kind of a funny starting point. It’s not exactly a starter song. I was at that show (7/31/13), and fell in love with the jam. I started working out bits and pieces of it on the piano, just for fun. The project just grew from there.
Was there something in your classical training that helped in the process of transcribing a band that is as improvisational as Phish?
I learned by the Suzuki method. It really focused on ear training. You learn to play songs by hearing them first. You don’t even learn to read the score until a few years in.
Did you ever look at someone else’s scores or transcriptions as a reference?
I didn’t reference anyone else’s scores or printed charts. Anytime you are arranging there are lots of different directions you can go, even if you are trying to remain very literal and very true to the original. I wanted those decisions to be mine and not influenced by someone else. The other part is I really enjoy the process of transcribing songs, arranging them, and learning them by ear. Each one of these songs, to me, is an awesome puzzle to learn and unlock. I love that process.
Phish, particularly in its composed repertoire, has been known to chart out each of the four parts. How did you fit four parts into two hands?
That is a great question. I have some videos online where I show how you can get three of the melodic lines into two hands. I don’t transcribe Fishman’s (drum) part. If I’m taking Page’s (piano) chords and harmonies in the left hand, and maybe Trey’s guitar line in the right, I can take some of the rhythms that Fishman’s doing and I can put those in the left hand.
Where is your divide between scoring and what’s left up to the emotion of the moment?
I’ve listened to this music so much. When I’m playing live and I’m doing some of those jam teases, and other more loose interpretations of their music, that is completely unscored and very emotive- a very different question between the live setting and what things were when I was recording the record.
When you approached a song to transcribe, did you use the studio version or the live version as a reference point?
For the tracks on the album, most of them I went from the studio version, although I’ve listened to all those songs many more times either live or on live recordings. The studio versions are easier because the audio quality is so good. You can really pick out each part. The live versions are influencing things, as well.
When using a live version, did you compare eras? As we both know, it’s never the same way once, let alone twice, with Phish performances.
It’s not like I’ve sat down and said, Let’s listen to forty different “Tweezer” versions and compare them from year to year. Although that sounds like a great way to spend a Sunday afternoon. I’ve done a lot of stuff from (Phish era) 3.0, and from the last three years in particular. I haven’t delved into the other eras as much because the style of jamming hasn’t been as conducive to (solo) piano.
In your study of this band, was there a prevailing genre or style the structure and composition of the songs most often fit, like jazz or classical?
I don’t think that’s an easy question to answer. I think the reason they are so interesting, why they captivate us, is because they don’t really fit (exclusively) in any of those genres.
Were there patterns or things like contrapuntal sections that you saw recurring across different songs?
There are so many things like that sprinkled all over the place.
But no dominant sound?
I think they sound like them. They are a very original band. That is for sure.
You obviously had an impressive skill-set in order to undertake this project. Have you seen improvements in your playing related to this project?
It’s definitely improved my skill-set. It’s interesting learning on the piano some of Trey’s guitar solos because they clearly are not built for the piano. They can turn into some pretty difficult technical figures on the piano. The biggest thing, though, has been rhythmically; trying to learn Mike’s bass line and Trey’s melody line at the same time and be able to play those simultaneously took a lot of practice. And, still does. That independence carries over into some of my other playing.
What’s been the most challenging or difficult song or part to translate to solo piano?
The middle section of the Tahoe “Tweezer,” where time kind of stops and the meter falls apart and all the structure is gone for a minute. It’s pretty ethereal, right about halfway through. That was, by far, the hardest part to learn. I never thought it would be so hard to just write down what you’re hearing when the meter has fallen away. I struggled with that minute of music more than other part of that jam. I just learned “It’s Ice,” and that was, by far, the hardest Phish song I’ve learned.
What about “It’s Ice” is especially challenging?
Trey and Mike have pretty soft, intricate melodies at the beginning. It’s sort of contrapuntal, like playing a fugue. There are no parts chasing each other, but two melody lines going at once, rather than melody and accompaniment. It took a lot of slow practice, thousands of times, over and over again. I really love that song and was determined to learn it.
Have you gotten any reaction form the band, whether they have listened to the album?
I haven’t heard anything from the band at all. Mike Gordon stopped by one of my shows in Philadelphia, which was a total surprise and very much an honor. He stayed and heard the Tahoe “Tweezer,” and I gave him a copy of the album. I sure hope they like it. This whole thing was done out of a deep love for what they do musically, and with a tremendous amount of respect. I was in touch with the Phish office, to get permission, and they were absolutely wonderful to work with.
If you were given the opportunity to sit-in with Phish, would you be trying to remember all that you have done?
No, I would need to forget some things. (Laughs). I would definitely not want to be stepping on someone’s toes.
I would imagine you’ve at least played along with the music when you were learning it.
I never play along with recordings. I like to hear it as it is.
You never played along to the music, even for fun?
Honestly, not even once.
I would never have guessed that.
I guess I do that in my head a little bit.
What’s the response been to your live performances, and will that determine how long you continue to perform Phish music?
The response has been incredibly positive so far. I’m sure the response will dictate whether I’m doing it at home in my living room for kicks or in front of an audience. I love Phish’s music. That’s a guarantee right there that I will continue to play their music. Do I see myself doing what I going now five years from now? Probably not. I don’t really like to do the same thing for years and years in any capacity in my life, but it will always be a part of the equation.
What’s been the best part of this process, aside from the personal accomplishment of it?
It opens up doors for people to Phish’s music that might not have been open otherwise. It lets people see it in a different light. That part, for me, is really gratifying and interesting.
