Am I a gear snob?

[cdaniel]

Our band just finished auditioning prospects to replace our departing lead player. It came down to two very comparable players and personalities. I found my vote leaning to one because he had an array of various pedals and the knowledge to use them properly. Where the other guy just showed up with one of those all in one entry level effects units.

I really hate to be that guy that would hold that for or against a player, but it really seemed to make the case for me.

I feel mean

[BigOldHarry]

Just what qualifies as a "Entry level effects" unit?

And did he *sound* good? That is what it's all about... right?

[JimiLL]

Its reassuring to know someone who (presumably) knows more about gear, given his uncontrolable GAS

[Foreman_]

I don't think it's abnormal to want to pick the guy who seemed to have the most professional setup. However if you're sacrificing quality of musician for quality of gear, well you can always upgrade your gear.

[faulknersj]

If they are really that comparable, and your band can benifit from his effects, than why not let that be the tie breaker? However, you must admit that it might feel a bit foolish if you were forced to reveal that the real reason for the basis of your decision to the losing candidate

[puddin tame]

i'd probably be a little irked if someone snobbed my GT 10b for being a multi effect

i'd go for whoever sounded better

[cdaniel]

Harry, it was a Digitech unit. "entry level' is how our other guitar guy described it
And yes, the effects he used weren't as appropriate for the songs as the other guy.

Forman, Both were good players, good guys so were not sacrificing there.

One just seemed more in tune to what tone a particular song needed, where the other one didn't seem to place as much value in that.

And we would never diss a guy on his gear as part of a "no thank you".

[C.Linton]

Originally Posted by cdaniel

Harry, it was a Digitech unit. "entry level' is how our other guitar guy described it
And yes, the effects he used weren't as appropriate for the songs as the other guy.

Forman, Both were good players, good guys so were not sacrificing there.

One just seemed more in tune to what tone a particular song needed, where the other one didn't seem to place as much value in that.

And we would never diss a guy on his gear as part of a "no thank you".

Well, now THAT's a valid reason to choose him over the other.

Unless you're just rationalizing.

[BigOldHarry]

Originally Posted by cdaniel

Harry, it was a Digitech unit. "entry level' is how our other guitar guy described it
And yes, the effects he used weren't as appropriate for the songs as the other guy.

Forman, Both were good players, good guys so were not sacrificing there.

One just seemed more in tune to what tone a particular song needed, where the other one didn't seem to place as much value in that.

And we would never diss a guy on his gear as part of a "no thank you".

Funny... There was a time when Digitech was considered top-shelf gear... Times change, I guess. I have had, and still have, Digitech gear and it's very nice.

May I suggest that you consider the source? You said, A GUITAR PLAYER was bagging on another GUITAR PLAYER'S gear. 80% of the time, when guitar players talk, I just here La la la la I'm great la la la I can do that la la la his gear sucks...

Ask yourself: Which guy did the job better? Simple.

[Downunderwonder]

Not very specific. I think I know what you meant but "the other guy" seems to refer back to the first subject being the guy with the stomp boxes having the less good sound. Or not?

[cdaniel]

Originally Posted by BigOldHarry

Funny... There was a time when Digitech was considered top-shelf gear... Times change, I guess. I have had, and still have, Digitech gear and it's very nice.

May I suggest that you consider the source? You said, A GUITAR PLAYER was bagging on another GUITAR PLAYER'S gear. 80% of the time, when guitar players talk, I just here La la la la I'm great la la la I can do that la la la his gear sucks...

Ask yourself: Which guy did the job better? Simple.

Yeah those guitar guys can be that way, not so much this one though.

Who did a better job? The one we picked. Proper use of tone and effects is part of a good job especially for a lead guy.

So I guess I'm answering my own qustion here too. I'm just a bit of a gear snob.

Maybe we should have picked they guy who had only two sounds, Ice pick in the temple loud clean and lumber mill circular saw distortion. And he took a cell phone call during the audition.

[cdaniel]

Originally Posted by Downunderwonder

Not very specific. I think I know what you meant but "the other guy" seems to refer back to the first subject being the guy with the stomp boxes having the less good sound. Or not?

Stomp box dude had the better sound.

[R. Laevinus]

I don't consider it gear snobbery at all. In fact I often scope out what the other guys are playing when I go to an audition, and make it a point to find out what people auditioning for my band are playing.

I've probably got at least 5 or 6k in gear and instruments, and the smarts to use it all. I don't consider that as owing toys or being rich, especially because I sacrificed quite a bit to obtain it. Music is important to me, and as such, I wish to equip myself with the Best. Possible. Gear. (That I can afford, of course.)

So for me, it's perfectly natural to raise an eyebrow at the guy who comes to my audition with a Squier, and I have actually turned down auditions with bands - who sounded good, to be fair - when I found out that their guitar player didn't own an amp, the singer had a Radio Shack mike, etc. As far as I'm concerned, that just says to me that music is a hobby for them, and that they are unwilling to sacrifice for their art.

But that's just me.

[gribuski]

Originally Posted by R. Laevinus

I don't consider it gear snobbery at all. In fact I often scope out what the other guys are playing when I go to an audition, and make it a point to find out what people auditioning for my band are playing.

I've probably got at least 5 or 6k in gear and instruments, and the smarts to use it all. I don't consider that as owing toys or being rich, especially because I sacrificed quite a bit to obtain it. Music is important to me, and as such, I wish to equip myself with the Best. Possible. Gear. (That I can afford, of course.)

So for me, it's perfectly natural to raise an eyebrow at the guy who comes to my audition with a Squier, and I have actually turned down auditions with bands - who sounded good, to be fair - when I found out that their guitar player didn't own an amp, the singer had a Radio Shack mike, etc. As far as I'm concerned, that just says to me that music is a hobby for them, and that they are unwilling to sacrifice for their art.

But that's just me.

I completely agree with this. To a great extent, IME, gear quality is a reflection on how serious you take music. That's obviously not the case is either a rich hobbyist or a talent without the monetary ability to afford good gear. In a playing context, though, this situation should make itself very clear and you would judge accordingly.

But in 15 years of playing with innumerable other musicians, as well as watching other bands, quality gear has been an almost perfect predictor of musicianship. If someone takes it serious, they will find a way to get decent gear.

The one exception: drummers. A couple of the best drummers I've seen and played with had the most terrible gear and didn't take care of it (no drum cases, etc.). But man, could they groove.

[totallyfrozen]

Guy with awesome gear means guy with money. Guy with money means guy the band can take advantage of. That usually seems to be the subconscious reason that bands pick the guy with the best gear, IME.

That said, I know some very good guitar players who prefer the all-in-one effects units over 50lbs worth of pedals laid out on the floor. I think you should make sure that if you're going to be gear snobby about it, that you actually know what you're talking about in regard to guitar effects. Could the be all-in-one unit that you dislike can do more than the other guy's pile of pedals and cables. I admit, I'm not an expert on those all-in-one setups because I prefer to have 50lbs worth of pedals scattered about the floor.

[pie_man_25]

I've met a guy with a radio shack guitar play the hell out of a guy with a $2,000 ESP.

HOWEVER, I've also used a $10 set of chisels, NOT good.

in short, tools don't make the carpenter, but bad tools can affect the work. If the guy didn't play well, then don't pick him, if his gear sucks and is affecting his sound, then he should probably still not be picked.

[shoot-r]

The absolute best guitarist I've ever worked with in my 40 + years of trying to play had a no name Gibson SG copy, a old Marshall head and a poorly built home made 2x12 cabinet...no effects beside the cord from the guitar to the amp......
What I'd have missed out on if we'd judged him by his equipment!!!

[C.Linton]

+1
To me it's more important how well he uses what ever equipment he has than what equipment he has. I would only judge him on his performance at an audition, not his gear or what brand name is on it, and I would hope others would have the same courtesy and not raise an eyebrow at my Squier bass.

[Gopherbassist]

I'm going to say that in this situation, it doesn't sound like it. If the two were comparable as you say, then the edge goes to whoever has an edge. If his edge is that he has pedals and knows how to use them, then that's all it is.

[Beginner Bass]

If they were roughly equally skilled musicians, had roughly equal additudes, were equally easy to get along with, then I wouldn't hold it against you.