reverb.com Artist "stores" thoughts

[movinginslomo]

So say hypothetically Dave Grohl owned the infamous snare he used on nevermind (he doesn't it was a famous rental) and was now planning on selling it. He makes one of those nice reverb videos (not knocking those) where he casually goes "this is the nevermind snare.. THAT one..". He goes on to state his intent on selling the gear is he wants it to be appreciated and used. Now what's to say a guy with a large pocketbook who doesn't even play drums doesn't buy the snare just to keep as an expensive trophy? "Yah Brah, have the Nevermind snare.. yea THAT ONE.. no.. too special to use you'd ruin it somehow, I keep it in a display case" As the artist do you just shrug and go "welp he paid for it.."? Or say some guitar rockstar sells HIS certain pedal that is no different than another used one on ebay, like say a tubescreamer. Are you buying it just because HE used it? What if he initially prices it at used market value but superfans get in a stupid bidding war? Does he just go "welp more money for me!"

My personal opinion being that no you can't stop people from doing that but it sucks when they state they want someone to enjoy it and some idiot superfan or big-pocketed douchebag just blows money it. What are other people's thoughts?

[muehring]

He should just lend it out for recordings if he wants people to use it.  Otherwise I doubt anyone that buys it is going to really use it.

[reddesert]

If something is "collectible" because of its backstory, then its value is no longer simply the use value. If rich-guy buys the snare (or Hendrix's Strat, etc) and hangs it on the wall, why do we care? We care because it's that particular snare; after all there are many other snares in the world. But that means our motivations are essentially the same as the rich collector's.

The good thing is that buying up Hendrix's Stratocaster is not nearly as bad as buying a famous painting and hanging it on the wall of your house so that only you can look at it. The Strat is just a tool, rather than the work of art itself. Everyone else can still listen to the music, while they can't see the painting.

There is a famous essay called "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" that discusses these distinctions.  It is quite dense, but worth attempting.

[EBRAddict]

If rich-guy buys the snare (or Hendrix's Strat, etc) and hangs it on the wall, why do we care?

Exactly. The special sauce wasn't the guitar, or the snare drum.

[thesmokingman]

without any provenance, its worth less. (or maybe even worthless). rockers aren't typically in the habit of keeping good enough records that their gear can be easily pinpointed. rarely something interesting comes along like the Bob Dylan strat where there's a small amount of provenance to begin with but then you do your homework and get it authenticated and suddenly you've really got something both culturally important and valuable. so from a purely "collector investment" standpoint you almost have to throw all that out and focus on what can absolutely be proven and determine its worth from there. I'll go with an item that falls into this category ... a beat up tube screamer with no real provenance that shows up on reverb selling for over $10,000 USD because someone claimed they got it from Cezar Diaz who got it from SRV ... meanwhile my thought is that its worth no more or less than any other beat up vintage tube screamer until $10,000 worth of collector value could be assigned to it through authentication and appraisal.

[gordo]

"Enjoy it" is just sales slang for "pay big bucks for". For someone with Grohl's resources I'd have to think it's like feeding the fish. Fun to watch a flurry of goofs. Plus cool bragging rights to sell a $100 drum for stratospheric prices. Would be cool to be able to afford to plunk down dumb money though...

[AntKnee]

If you bought Babe Ruth's bat, would you play baseball with it? No. Do you think he would have expected you too? I doubt it.
Of course a collector or someone who wants to show it off, brag about it, etc. will buy it.

[Muadzin]

Well, the snare from Nevermind, the TS-808 from a SRV or the Strat from Hendrix all sound just the same as every other contemporary product. Their sole value is in their claim to fame and the assorted bragging rights that come with owning it. As such there is no advantage in touring with it, or playing with it. Other then perhaps again the bragging rights of saying I'm playing ....'s instrument. Which might be sorta cool if you used it on a record, but if you tour with that gear and its known, you better well hire some security because otherwise it will get stolen. Also the fact that instrument X cost that much to buy because it used to belong to artist Y means you're even less likely to use it, after all, using gear means subjecting it to wear and tear. Pedals get stomped upon, drums get hit upon, guitars take a beating and get sweat upon as well. There's a reason why many hard worked guitars look like Rory Galagher's. Which is fine if its your own instrument, not if you paid $100K for Jimi Hendrix's Strat. So behind the glass it will go regardless.

Which is perfectly fine, right? What would you rather have happen to your old instrument? That it will be taken well care off in controlled conditions or are that some yahoo will abuse it?

[Bret608]

If something is "collectible" because of its backstory, then its value is no longer simply the use value. If rich-guy buys the snare (or Hendrix's Strat, etc) and hangs it on the wall, why do we care? We care because it's that particular snare; after all there are many other snares in the world. But that means our motivations are essentially the same as the rich collector's.

The good thing is that buying up Hendrix's Stratocaster is not nearly as bad as buying a famous painting and hanging it on the wall of your house so that only you can look at it. The Strat is just a tool, rather than the work of art itself. Everyone else can still listen to the music, while they can't see the painting.

There is a famous essay called "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction" that discusses these distinctions.  It is quite dense, but worth attempting.

Walter Benjamin! Very appropriate for this discussion. I once themed some pedal art on his "Paris, Capital of the Nineteenth Century." Anyway, interesting discussion. Carry on...!

[TNblueshawk]

I understand the sentiment behind the OP and I think we all get it. We would love to see things that are meant to be played, played by someone, anyone versus collecting dust but at the end of the day it doesn't really matter to me. If some dude wants to hang something on the wall and brag to his rich buddies he has a right to do this. If he is a cool dude, great. If he is some rich lawyer douche bag then so be it but either way we just have to suck it up and move on as very little ends up being ideal in the real world.

[drezdn]

I'd only really get annoyed if it was something really unique and rare sounding, like a Ludwig Phase II.

[movinginslomo]

Well it's the fact they sell it on reverb thinking it will go to a fellow peer or talented musician when it could go to an idiot fan remortgaging his house for it. (seen it happen!)