Santana

M.E.N Arena, Manchester

Thursday 11 May 2006

Another one that has taken an absolute age to get down to writing - but compared with the one I have just completed for Dio, it has been done at lightning speed, a whole eight months quicker! I can only say that apart from the usual sheer laziness, in this case it is likely that the nature of both the act and the group put me off: both are complete curate's eggs and I've never been entirely sure what to write. Anyway, the time's come to have a stab at it before I get too far behind.

As ever, let's start off with a bit of context. "Santana" is Carlos Santana the guitarist, nothing more, nothing less. The concept of Santana as a group ceased to have any real meaning after about 1972, when dizzying changes in group personnel and musical direction rendered the concept of the group superfluous. Thus the concert was all about Santana the guitarist, it is why most people went (I think), and it's one of the main reasons why I have issues with the concert.

Carlos Santana made his name in the late sixties, at the time Jimi Hendrix had set the world alight with his revolutionary guitar playing, and at the same time that Led Zeppelin were starting to send out seismic shocks. It was the most fertile period in the history of rock for imagination, improvisation, boldness and sheer brilliance. It's no coincidence that this is the precise period when virtually all my favourite acts were starting out, or thinking of doing so, and even if they didn't, it's the prime era that inspired everything else. Thus along came Santana: without doubt one of the world's greatest ever, and certainly one of the most innovative, guitarists. What he did was still undeniably "hard rock", but it was radically different to Led Zeppelin, being heavily Latin and jazz based. I think you could say that Santana is an acquired taste even for a seasoned rock fan, but without putting too fine a point on it, I know people that actively LOATHE his music - shame!

What makes things difficult is that after the first three albums, which were still essentially hard rock, albeit of a very "different" kind, his subsequent albums veered all over the place, especially to weird free form jazz and an overload on Eastern religion mumbo jumbo. To cap it all, he was then "re-discovered" in the late nineties with massive commercial (pop) success based around the Latin formula and cover versions. As an aside, it's undoubtedly due to this latter day success and his "new" fans that enabled him to fill up an arena like the MEN at extortionate prices, because not too long ago he would be looking to appear at venues like the Manchester Academy (as per Dio) or The Lowry Theatre (as per Paul Rodgers).

It is thus not too easy to be a big fan of Santana, and I did think a few times before deciding to get a ticket, especially at such ludicrously pumped up prices. After appropriate deliberation, I decided that it would not be right to miss the chance of seeing one of my all time favourites - after all, it's likely to be my only chance - and thanks to making the effort, I don't need to go again, and although I did enjoy the concert, I won't want to!

All the "issues" I mentioned above came out in full display at the concert and made it the curate's egg to end all curate's eggs. If truth be told, the essential problem with Santana is that he doesn't really have very tunes, or classic tracks. There is some memorable stuff on the early albums, and of course, the recent commercial stuff, but, once you have heard one fifteen minute long Latin/jazz improvisatory jam session, you have heard all the fifteen minute long Latin/jazz improvisatory jam sessions that you want to hear, and they just get boring. I found particular objection to a very overlong drum solo. If I was watching a group such as Rush or Deep Purple I would well nigh expect such a drum solo and would have no objections, unless it was extended to ludicrous John Bonham lengths - but here, I had paid tons of money to see one of the world’s most legendry guitarists, and good as the drum solo probably was, I felt that to have that imposed on us was bordering on the offensive.

Too much slagging off!? Yes, probably. On the positive side, it was a honour and a supreme pleasure to see an all time legend amply proving why he is so highly revered. To put the cap on it, the audience came to life in a big way when a selection of the new stuff was played.

Apart form the bizarre incident of the drum solo, my main complaint is that he didn’t play his "greatest hit", "Black Magic Woman". Such an omission is unforgivable. I don't care whether he is bored with it, the fact is that it's what most people in the audience want to hear and I strongly believe that performers are under a moral obligation to at least make an effort to please their fans. Can you imagine Deep Purple not playing "Smoke On The Water" -it really is on that level. This incident reminded me of the arrogance and disdain that Robert Plant, a performer of a similar vintage, showed his audience.

A good experience, warts and all. I don't for one minute regret my decision to go, but basically because it was a once in a lifetime. The sound quality was good, from what I can remember, and the concert was reasonably generously timed.

I went accompanied by my good friend Mr Geoff Pearce, who tells me that he last saw Santana at the Stretford Hard Rock in 1972 - my all time favourite venue even though it's been demolished for decades and I've never been. But wow, what a thought, that really was the best time (and location) to see Santana: tonight could only ever really be a pale imitation.

15.11.07