I born in Argentina and grew up in Costa Rica, so yes I have been exposed a lot to latin music and GOD I HATE IT!
uke: So Santana actually not only does nothing for me, I find it uncomfortable to listen to.
Now because of my upbringing I like Argentinian folk music, so I don't have an issue when metal bands combine that influence in their music. Neither I have a problem with Spanish bands that combine flamenco or other sounds into their songs (I recommend Paco de Lucia extensively to listen to good Spanish guitar music).
I'm a bad Latin example, I can relate more with a band like Tyr that plays Faroese and Danish folk than to Latin music. One exception may be Brazilian rhythms, they're really good specially in jazz fusion, so if anyone cares you can check Kiko Loureiro (Angra) second solo album "Universo Inverso", great stuff indeed.
P.S. And Mana is awful to the Nth degree (pop latin rock), so is Jaguares, Juanes and all those ...things
I used to hate it also my friend... but in the past few years I have been getting into latin music, particularly Salsa ala Celia Cruz etc.
As for Argentinian music, I do like Gustavo Santaolalla. Though I do not know how to classify his music. I love his work on soundtracks like Brokeback Mountain, The Motorcycle Diaries, Babel etc.I do love Flamenco music and Paco de Lucia's playing. He was great in Mediterrean Sundance with John McLaughlin and Al Di Meola and i also like the song he did with Brian Adams as well as his own work. Also thanks for the recommendation. I'll check out Kiko's album(s) sometime.
P.S. I know Mana is sucky but i do like that song Mariposa
making albums now with multiple guest artists is his style now. just like he did a few jazz influenced albums and a few r&b influenced albums and at the end of the 70's/early 80's he did a few mainstream rock influenced albums. almost every artist in music does something successful and then follows that pattern for a few albums until that dies then tries something new. its called reinventing yourself and every band except for maybe ac/dc and motorhead do that
That goes without saying but the point I was trying to make is that Santana's career was down the tubes in the 90's (he didn't even have a recording contract with a label) and Clive Davis took a shot to bring his career back. Now that is all and fine but Clive Davis is known for taking total control of a recording project and he insisted that for signing Santana and bringing his career back, Santana had to abide by Clive's conditions. One of which was to have an all star cast on the album. Santana had no artistic expression/freedom or say on how the album should be. The reason i know this is because 60 minutes did a segment on Clive 2 or 3 years ago and Santana was brought up by 60 minutes. They didn't say it the way i said it but it was obvious what was meant. That Clive was the savior of Santana's career. And that he also did the same for Rod Stewart, Whitney Houston, Kelly Clarkson etc. I think it was a shame that Rod had to do a album like It Had to Be You.... The Great American Songbook. But Clive pushed him on it. I wanted to puke when I saw Rod kissing Clive's ass literally on that 60 minutes segment. Kelly Clarkson tried to break from Clive because she wanted to write and record her own songs but Clive threatened to ruin her career if she tried that and she eventually had to back off. So like I said I do not have a problem with artists bringing guests on their albums but only if it's their choice and not forced upon by some record executive.
And Saxon and Hammerfall and Wolf And Sabaton too, and God I love them for that
.
I'm not against reinventing, look what Ritchie Blackmore did after closing the chapter with Deep Purple and Rainbow, Blackmore's Night is a great idea. Or Vintersorg with Waterclime, excellent progressive rock without any relation to black metal.
But I believe in the famous saying
if ain't broken, don't fix it , if a formula works for a band and the fans like it, what's the point in changing?
Exactly... though change isn't so bad sometimes and depending on which artist/band. Not all would do good with change like Motorhead and AC/DC.
That was a pretty bad post man. You read into and/or distract... twist everything that anybody says that doesnt agree with you.
No offense but you have been guilty of the same from time to time. But let's not go there.
Plain and simple, Carlos gained his reputation as a guitar player early in his career because of how he played and he is special in that aspect, no one said he was a virtuoso.
I think it had to do more with the latin influences he used then his playing. The guitar playing is an afterthought on peoples minds except for guitarists themselves like you and me.
Your statement... "i seriously have not heard anyone whose influence you can directly say is from Santana" If you havent heard it anywhere else... WELL?... that makes him unique or special. I have heard many throw out a bit of Santana expression now and then. Nowhere did I say there was a Santana clone, so I can only imagine why you want to go there, especially knowing everyone draws influences from many guitarists. But to go back to what I mentioned before, Gary Moore, Satriani and Ernest Isley come to mind rapidly.
It would make him unique and special if everyone copied him imo because then his guitar playing is considered great. What is that old saying? : Imitation is the sincerest form of Flattery. As for Moore, Satch, Isley etc. I don't hear it.
unless you mean they are tonal players...
Why did you went off on a tangent about who knows what about Latin music? Nowhere did I say anything about what constituded good Latin music, or that Santana was Latin music... only that Santana applied it, very little surprise considering who he is.
You implied it imo. His "grooves" and this and that about his bringing Latin to rock etc. Considering who he is? You can be born latin and not be latin. Trust me on that. Wyv knows what i mean.
"Nothing special, not great"... forgetting your validation to what is special about Santana and the great music, melodies & unique expression he has brought to the table... its only your opinion, definantly not fact
I never said it was fact much like I keep telling you your opinions are not fact as well. I always said this before, were all entitled to our own opinions but not our own facts. You can disagree with me and vice/versa but we can respect each other's opinions imo.
Incidently, I would think most anyone fimiliar with Santana is also aware of DiMeola, Paco, Corea... hell Herb Alpert and Desi Arnaz for that matter... lol. DiMeolas and Pacos success in the 70's as well as Mclaughlin and Coryell delving into Latin pretty much disproves that the Latin sound in various twists did not catch on.... then sliding into pop rock acts of the 80's.
It never has caught on in a mass appeal is what I meant. Excluding pure latin music, latin influenced music like Latin fusion, Latin Rock ala Santana in the present time, etc. was never that big of mass appeal. But I think we all have a different definition of what mass appeal is. When it becomes a hit , it comes and goes but never really catches on for long.
