I was listening to a radio station out of Orlando, Florida today, and they had Carlos Santana on the phone to plug some upcoming concerts in the area. The folks from the Orlando radio show were giving him a series of questions about many topics, and one of the radio personalities, a fledging guitarist, asked Santana what guitar, amp and effects he used.

Santana, sighed and said that all of the guitarist that he had the pleasure of working with over the years, including Hendrix, always hated this question. He told the on-air personality that it would have been more of a compliment if instead of asking what guitar or effect that was used to play a certain note, that he should ask, "What were you thinking or feeling when you played that note?"

I was listening to this in my car, and I immediately thought of some of the current threads here, like whether or not HCB used Zeiss or Leitz lenses, or which generation of lens blows which other generation out of the water. I thought there was a parallel there. It is a different art, but still an art where some people think the success comes from the moniker on the gear. Was McCurry thinking, "Wow, look at her face!" or "Sure glad I have my Nikon with 105mm f/2.5." It's not what was used, but what was thought or felt.

HCB could have used a Pentax K-1000 and a 50mm lens from that company and been effective, and Santana could grab any Amateur guitar off of the rack from any shop and make it talk. Conversely, a "collector" that brags about having the latest and greatest, or having the same lens that so and so used, doesn't guaranty anything successful will be captured on film.

"What were you thinking or feeling when you played that note?" Santana's comment was interesting to me, and I thought I'd share.

-- Al Smith (smith58@msn.com), March 18, 2002

Answers

Here, here! Nice reflection...

-- Patrick (pg@patrickgarner.com), March 18, 2002.

A great comparison, Al. You're right, of course, about HCB being able to do his thing with any ol' camera. He THOUGHT he was using a basic, no-frills little hand tool with as much sex appeal as a screwdriver. Little did he know!

-- Preston Merchant (merchant@speakeasy.org), March 18, 2002.

It's good to be reminded, once in a while, of what's important. Eisenstadt said that once he wanted a new camera bag, but he didn't buy it, because he didn't see how it could improve his photography.

If a picture I take is going to be any good, I will usually feel some sense of excitement and urgency to take it. The ones I take because I think it's time to look for something to shoot, come out humdrum.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 18, 2002.

Yes, I've heard the sighs in the audience before too when a poor fledgling photographer doesn't know better than to ask that question at a slideshow or something...

However, you can't tell me Carlos never sat around with Hendrix, or whoever, and never talked about the guitars and amps they like. Of course they did. What he said on the radio seems to be a common sentiment in the middle and upper levels of photgoraphy too.

I think it's at least silly, and at worst intellectual elitism. Equipment preferences are important to some people--so what? I hate using EOS (had it forced on me for a few years and is responsible for swaying me toward buying my own R gear). EOS took the fun out of photography for me, for reasons I won't bore you with. I take better pictures with other gear. It makes a difference to some people--I would bet especially when talking about the difference between SLRs and Leica Ms. Where's the harm in talking about it? And so where are all the photographers using Pentax K1000 cameras--they're cheap as hell and if they were realistic I think plenty of pros would be quite happy to save the money and spend it on a project.

Just my €.02.

-- dave yoder (lists@home.com), March 18, 2002.

Well said Al, Especially when Im fully expecting to see a "M3 is the greatest, smoothest, most mystical, experience Ive ever had" to be posted soon. Best,

-- Marke Gilbert (Bohdi137@aol.com), March 18, 2002.

Thanks for sharing Al. But several posts seem to suggest that because someone famous (HCB or Santana) doesn't care too much about his equipment that I or others should feel the same way. I am a collector (and user) so I care about equipment. Others who post also care and some don't. To each his own. For those that don't care, they don't have to respond to threads dealing particularly with equipment. What I don't like is for others to tell me hoiw I should feel about this issue (by example or otherwise).

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), March 18, 2002.

ok, I've got to tell this story (I have before) because it really is related to your Leica discussions. I used to own a guitar amplifier company and Carlos Santana was a client. He was given the latest model with channel switching, distortion controls, footswitch control of effects, the whole enchilada. that amplifier now sits in my studio because Carlos didn't want it. he and his guru felt that his music was suffering because of the complications of technology. Carlos went back to the very first amplifier that had little else other than a volume control. this was the purity he felt he needed to sustain his spiritual and creative happiness. by the way, Carlos is a gentleman, courteous and polite, giving, and a fine human being. not that the parallels between Carlos and Leica fit perfectly, but you can read between the lines for your own pursuits.

-- daniel taylor (lightsmythe@agalis.net), March 18, 2002.

Its always been amusing that people seem to think that the equipment makes the (fill in the blank). What is wrong with wanting to know what someone uses? Granted, there is more to photography, music, painting, etc. than what brand of gear one uses and I guess, hope maybe, that people use whatever gear helps them achieve the results they seek. Others of course, carry Leica or Fender because it is a Leica or Fender.

A long time ago I was a medical photographer and we used Nikons and Hasselblads. One day, I was taking pictures for one of the neurosurgeons and he tried to grab my camera to see what it was. He derided me for using Nikon. He said he "had Leicas" and asked if I knew what they were. I wish I had had the confidence to ask him what brand of scalpel he used.

-- jeff (debontekou@yahoo.com), March 18, 2002.

Based on this discussion, I'm reminded of a commercial I have seen on TV a number of times. It takes place in a men's locker room at a gym. Michael Jordan is changing, and a bunch of other guys who are standing around watching, see that he is wearing pinkish red underwear. Fast forward to same scene, next day (or week). All of these guys are now wearing pink underwear. Just thought I'd share.

-- Eliot (erosen@lij.edu), March 18, 2002.

Who is/was Carlos Santana?

-- Williamn (wmitch3400@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.

I nice reflection and one we all forget at times. We're just some good old Leica maniacs with expensive toys....and we love it!

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.

I can tell you what Santana was feeling...he was feeling stoned! Don't get me wrong, Lotus and Abraxas are masterpieces, but let's be real here ;-)

Of course there is a legitimate gripe on his part, because I'm sure a lot of fledgling guitar students ask him about this and it gets old. But any artist/ craftsman shouldn't feel bad about wanting/discussing quality tools...the fact is that you can't count on a K1000 in the field the way you can count on a Leica. I think it's important to strike a balance. Let's remember most early photographers had to be fairly accomplished scientists/ technicians...and certainly a little bit off, because who else would expose themselves to mercury vapor?

-- Carlin (carlinm@abac.com), March 18, 2002.

I am sure that Santana uses the guitar which he considers to be the finest for HIS music. So, if a person can afford it, why shouldn't a photographer use that camera which he or she believes to be the best. Furthermore, why wouldn't an artist, muscian or photographer, research what that best equipment is . A no brainer!

-- John Elder (celder2162@aol.com), March 18, 2002.

Allen, either you have something against college kids or you are a very unhappy person. Virtually every post you've replied too recently has been with negative conotations. I am guessing you are older than say, a college kid, so I would expect to see maturity beyond such an age. Leaving useless negative comments is distracting and doesn't do you any favours.

Can I recommend that you maybe think twice before posting "yawns" and other comments not appreciated by a majority of forum users. When you are positive, I have nothing against you, but when you are negative, it is not fair to others on this forum that have to put up with it. Maybe you're having a bad day. I don't know, but I look forward to seeing some better posts comming from you in the near future.

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.

Obviously, the guitarists mentioned in this thread are great musicians who would come up with amazing stuff no matter what they played with, but the gear analogy doesn't totally hold up here in my opinion. Maybe Santana isn't lusting after the latest, greatest wizzbang guitar or amplifier, but he is most certainly using exactly what he wants and is definitely interested in the "gear" aspect of his profession. Lots of musicians choose older amplifiers because they use vacuum tube technology to produce the sounds, as opposed to the more current trend of solid-state. The resulting sounds out of the tube amps have more warmth and depth than the respective SS models. There are just as many gearhead musicians who get every bit as fetishist and picky about vintage equipment as anyone on this forum gets about Leicas. If Santana chose the older amp over the new one, it was certainly because it sounded better, not just because it was older. And even the specific gear is important. If you want a guitar sound like Stevie Ray Vaughn, you need a Stratocaster. Period. Same goes for Hendrix. Yes, much of their sound is in their fingers, but the same licks played on a different guitar would have a very different sound, simply because single coil pickups produce a different aural quality than humbuckers, which, incidently are the pickups used in Carlos Santana's Paul Reed Smith guitars. Both guitarists would play amazing stuff whatever they used, but even with music, the instrument is a part of the equation. Whether you decide to play a Fender, a Gibson, or some funky old Tesco Del Rey from a pawnshop. And make no mistake, Hendrix was VERY picky about his guitar sound. There are numerous interviews with him, and his engineers and producers which testify to this. The guy had a running account with Manny's in NYC and would go in and buy whatever new pedal or guitar they had in, just to see if it would add something to his sound.

-- Jason Guyer (suite_cheetah@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.

Having a Leica is going back to basics. I used to own all brand new EOS kit with every known feature known to man but as I learn my craft I used less and less of these until I realised I needed a camera with a very good lens and a spot meter. This is why I bought an SL nine years ago.

I only need my eyes to compose and use the education I've gained to operate it and when I click the shutter I know I have the picture.

-- Philip Woodcock (phil@pushbar.demon.co.uk), March 18, 2002.

The difference with Carlos Santana (and every other musician I have met) is that they don't think their particular choice of equipment is better, just that it does what they want it to do. Bernie Worrell, who has done everything from P-Funk to Talking Heads to the Letterman band, plays some of the most awful keyboards around, including stuff that's out of tune, but he seems to know how to make them sound right. When buying equipment, or hearing someone do something new, there is a lot of discussion, but otherwise...

The other thing is that every musician I've met would rather talk about their music than the equipment. I've sat around with some great musicians from Weather Report to Thelonius Monk to Vernon Reid (Living Color) to Pat Metheny (whose music I don't really like but he is a great guitarist), and not once has the topic of equipment come up.

I think it's because the successful ones know that endless equipment discussion leads to non-productivity.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), March 18, 2002.

Al,

I guess if the guitar / amp didn't really matter then a lot of guitarists wouldn't switch from a Stratocaster to a Les Paul between numbers. Instruments and amplifiers have unique sonic signatures or characteristics that musicians select to convey specific moods or tonal colors in a song. Some players won't blow through anything but a tube amp and some photographers won't use anything but an all- manual camera.

Since aspiring artists, such as musicians and photographers, learn through imitation (e.g., an artist sitting with an easel attempting to re-create a Monet painting hanging on the wall in a museum), it's not unusual or abnormal or improper for newbies to ask. In the end, the camera never climbs out of the bag to snap a photo and the guitar never plugs in an plays "Little Wing" by itself.

The artist's instrument becomes the channel for expressing concept and creativity. I think that a lot of artists do indeed get tired of answering the "what kind of ... do you use?" and Santana makes a good point in his response; that the creative process is what's important.

A lot of folks do indeed place value / prestige on price tags and labels. That's ok, too. However, I think that the tools of our craft / art are important and do indeed warrant discussion. I envy photographers who can produce a life's work with one camera and one lens. I can't and I don't know how to do it. Maybe I'm just being ambitously lazy.

Good discussion.

-Nick

-- Nicholas Wybolt (nwybolt@earthlink.net), March 18, 2002.

In responce to Williamn, go to www.santana.com/carlos Cheers, Pat.

-- Pat Dunsworth (pdunsworth@aryarch.com), March 18, 2002.

Thanks Kristian! Should that be allen1@BITTERnet.com? It is a good discussion, and have a sense of humor...Geez!

-- Carlin (carlinm@abac.com), March 18, 2002.

Check out this article;

http: //www.wired.com/wired/archive/7.01/eno_pr.html

-- tim (emulsion71@hotmail.com), March 18, 2002.

It's an interesting article. But Eno has output to show that it matters. Too many people who talk about cameras all day have no output. That's the difference here.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), March 18, 2002.

I'm with you Jeff. Opps, I'm out of here. Got to get my gear ready for a trip. Where instead of talking about taking photographs, I'm going to actually take some. With my incoming M7. But I'm taking the M6 I'm having sex with, just in case the M7's new batteries fail. Oh yeh, I best take lenses in cases with spots on them so I know which lens I'm using and have something to meter. Hmmm, can't use the "Decisive Moment" technique any more, or I might be accused of beating my wife and being a Nazi. And for Gods' sake I better wear black so I'm not mistaken for a woman, and to assure no one sees my camera. Now where's that black tape...because if the general public EVER saw this forum I'd most certainly want to tape over the Leica badge.

-- Marc Williams (mwilliams111313MI@comcast.com), March 18, 2002.

to better illuminate the point of my story, Carlos is *very* selective regarding his equipment and is looking for a particular sound. my point was, much like the latest M6 vs M7 debates, is that the technology was getting in the way of his artistry. the amplifier sounded fine, but the process and myriad options was not where he wanted to go. whether or not that applies to the M7 transition, I don't know or care, but it is something you should consider if it doesn't resonate with your style.

postscript: my observations from working with many professional musicians, is that the equipment really didn't matter much at all. they seemed to be able to transcend the hardware, just as great photography can come from anywhere.

-- daniel taylor (lightsmythe@agalis.net), March 18, 2002.

I think it is a passing phrase in everyones' life. Santana probably at the early part of this carrier did look into all equipment aspects and tested every guitars that were made then and after finally reaching guitar nirwana, did not look back and stick with the one or ones he like. Maybe also great photographers like HCB, Bill Brandt, Snowdown etc. On a personal note, I was an equipment hog buying equipments as if there was no tomorrow but after a while, you seem to realise, what are all these equipments for? It is basically to take a photograph (its another thing if you keep equipments for the sake of keeping equipments/or for investments). And after all these purchases, I find that there are actually only certain equipments that I use according to the type of photography I do, others are not necessary. When you show someone your photos it's heart warming to hear that you take very good photos, your composition is spot on, the decisive moment captured, exposure ok. That is the compliment that I am looking for and not that camera or lens hanging over my neck. Though I may not as yet manage to shoot anything extraordinary or develop a style that I can call my own, I now at least know that I have left behind the equipments issue and have only one last hurdle to jump ie take good photographs. Regards/Wong from Malaysia

-- wongkh (dosi@pd.jaring.my), March 18, 2002.

"Kristian

These are a group of my fellow countrymen taking the P*** i cannot believe you are still supporting them,not from your previous posts."

Allen,

Some of my previous posts have been ridiculous relatiation ones, which haven't seemed to do any good. They are also nothing like yours, because my comments aren't comming from seomwhere evil. My intentions are always good, sometimes just not worded in the best way possible. So may I suggest that you learn from your mistakes as I have and shut up!

-- Kristian (leicashot@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.

As a 'hacker' at the guitar myself I definitely agree with Jeff. I too know some top notch muscicans (I've worked quite a bit with Jann Arden and other Canadians) and find that, while yes, they will talk 'tools' to a degree, it does seem to be different. Whereas a musician will likely say he can get a better sound out of certain guitar, it is the sound he is looking for and whether the guitar is brand name or not is immaterial. Many aspiring photographers however can't wait to get the money together for the latest Leica (for example), feeling that somehow it will improve their photos just because it is a Leica.

-- Bob Todrick (bobtodrick@yahoo.com), March 19, 2002.

Well I am a guitar player myself and, like others have said, I am sure Carlos hates this question in many ways because it is just so "obvious". Also, I bet he changes his rig quite a bit depending whether he is at home, in a stadium, recording etc. etc. So any answer he gives is likely to sound evasive and perhaps even confusing. I too hate the question "what is your favorite x..." I never know the answer. But on another level you can guarantee that Carlos knows very well what he likes and what he doesn't like. The fact that he is the kind of guy who can get any guitar he likes as an "endorsement" makes him lucky and so in a sense he does not have to worry about the equipment side to the same degree as someone like me. Still there is something painfully gauche about the guy who asks this question and goes away thinking that if he buys the same kit he will sound like the man himself. I am sure that is these considerations that result in Santana's unwillingness to answer the question, rather than a real lack of interest in the equipment per se. In fact we know what Carlos likes guitar wise (well he used to use them at least) he has his own customised Paul Reed Smith(s).

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.

As to Jeff S's quip about talk and no output. He has no idea what our output is. On a forum like this it is expressly designed for chat and he is ventialting quite as much hot air as the rest of us.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 19, 2002.