Do demo videos count as an artist using gear?

I've posted a few submissions based on artists using gear in demo videos, and a few were recently flagged for containing an "incorrect item". My question is if an artist uses a piece of gear in one of these contexts, does it count as them using it?

Thanks.

not to me, otherwise Pete Thorn's page would be miles long

No they don't. They used to be marked with #productdemo to allow the mods to go back and delete them later.

They were accepted until a later time when they would be dealt with.

I personally never accepted them myself. I think it's misleading. Someone looking for what gear was used by a certain famous musician and you see a junk, $200 guitar on their page because they held one once in a video. Blah. I think, if they didn't use it on a published album or they didn't use it on stage with evidence showing it, then it shouldn't be listed. It's their gear page, not a list of every product they've ever touched.

Okay, now, this is pretty much a huge topic to rant about.

But, I do count them, considering they played it, and also, Equipboard has question like "What item have you seen with artist?" not like "Oh goodness, okay, what item have you seen with artist? We do not include those guitar shop demonstrations where they are all cool and chill, but cannot play a normal set irl."

So, if there isn't noted, I still count them as submissions.

With all the sorrow and regrets I'm going to have after saying this, but fuck my 200 and something Equipboard I made for Rob Chapman.

Or Phil X. Or Rabea Massaad.

As far as I know, there is no hard and fast rule about this on Equipboard.

I would be inclined to say that if a pro artist is using a product in a demo video, it should count as a correct submission. There are lots of different types of product <--> artist associations. Broadly, I would say we're distinguishing between these two types:

1) The implicit endorsement, where the artist doesn't necessarily talk about an item they use, and the Equipboard community can discover it, and debate the details and accuracy.

2) The explicit endorsement, where a brand sponsors an artist, and has them pose for a photo, write a Tweet, post an Instagram... or do a demo video. Sure, it might not feel as authentic as the other case, but I argue it's still interesting. In fact, the demo videos by artists often go into much more detail, and you can get a great sense for how the artist uses a piece of gear. I'm personally thankful when brands put out really interesting videos about artists and their gear, even if the endorsement is painfully obvious :)

We started Equipboard with the spirit that most artist <--> product associations are interesting, and there needs to be a place on the Internet where this stuff is collected, backed by a super passionate community (you all!) that can talk discover it, talk about it, and keep it accurate. Let's say Equipboard did golf, and someone added this Instagram of Under Armour shoes to Jordan Spieth. Is the endorsement painfully obvious? Definitely! Is this information interesting to some people, and would make them curious about the shoes? Your milage may vary, but I would argue yes!

tl;dr: I vote yes, demo videos count because it's a legit artist/item association.

tl;dr: I vote yes, demo videos count because it's a legit artist/item association.

I disagree because of guys like Pete Thorn who will demo ANYTHING on youtube if you pay him to, but their other videos make it quite clear what gear they use as working pros. Guy like that get loaned promotional units, make the demo, then return them unless its something they really like (and then you see them use it on stage or in the studio) and they start endorsing said product wholeheartedly. I love Pete Thorn's video demos (and respect his ability to get at least 1 useable sound from any old junk on the market), they are informative and solid as hell usually, but I would not say he USES much of that gear. He's just taking it through its paces for other potential consumers at the behest of the manufacturer. If he has his pick of gear though he does not reach for most of the stuff he has demoed, he doesn't even own it. I can't call that a fair equipboard sighting.

Both sides have valid opinions. Until the rules change, I don't feel the need to delete items if the musician plays through them and offers their perspective on them.

In case anybodies wondering, I'm the one denying these submissions. When I or anybody I know go on Equipboard, It's to see what gear an artist used in order to get the tone in a live or recorded song/audio whatever. Those demo videos are just product endorsements and if you guys want to accept them as submissions, fine.

But my 2 cents on the subject is discrimination between items that make up an artists sound and items an artist endorses because they were paid to or they recommend. But leaving them as regular submissions leads to something like the following effects pedal page. He has 31 effects in total and there's no way I or any commoner who comes and goes is going to comb through each and every pedal to find which one was on his pedalboard and which one he just mentioned offhandedly.

Case in point

In this video where Vai discusses perfect pedal order, he plays through the OD1X at 5:17, and mentions how he likes to run overdrive into a distorted amplifier.

OK, that would normally be just a good description that may need meat should another source present itself. But this is a demonstration where Steve Vai is demoing stock Boss pedals. That #Product Endorsement thing should be lined up on the top if you guys want to accept those submissions so people can see it easily. That way we can all differentiate a pedal on Vai's board and an endorsement.

Now excuse me, I have a flu to get over.

Okay Gchairen, I like that you used a golf example so I will too.

If your a fan of Tiger Woods and wanted to either get the new club he was sporting on TV or improve your swing through any secret items he may have, "Elbow brace, magnetized gloves, etc", would you be looking for items that he uses in his trade or items that he endorses?

He endorses Gatorade, a video game by EA Sports, Buick cars, NetJets "A private plane firm", and Upper Deck trading cards.

None of these items would be considered for improving a swing nor would they give any advice on what new club he was using. It's just what he's payed to put his name or face over. I don't think there are many golfers out there thinking, "Man, I need to know what kind of airplane Tiger owns" or "What is this crap! They didn't even list all the cards from Fleet he was listed on from 1996 to 2003!"

When you look up a recipe, do you want to know what kind of underwear Wolfgang Puc wore when he came up with it? Essentially, EquipBoard is a list of recipes for musicians. We're looking for tonal properties, wattages, and enhancers. What they drink, what they drive, what they won.... all that is unnecessary.

This is what drives my opinion in the matter as well as personal experience searching for a certain pedal and having to scroll passed a bunch of nonsense to find it.

This is really a tough one for me. My thought is to include it. I think everyone has really good points, but ultimately for me, it gets down to what can be proven.

If an item is associated with someone (or they said something about it), I like adding the item and linking to the proof. I think while it may or may not be a relevant item depending on who you are and what is important to you, the alternative solution is much less defined to me. If we only include the important stuff, who gets to decide what is important? Are tuners important? EQ pedals? Is a guitar that someone used on the Tonight Show performance but not on the album important? I would rather post the link and let people decide what is relevant to them.

I know there are outliers which makes this really difficult. If Chappers owned every guitar he demoed, he'd have quite the collection. My personal approach is to approve it and try to post the most appropriate notes I can so as to not mislead if I know they don't really use that guitar. Something like, "In this demo video, Rob demos this guitar and says, "I love the fretboard, but would never buy it because it's just not my style..." about the telecaster." or something similar.

Thoughts?

I agree with you, but I've also never seen a famous person holding a "junk $200 guitar"

I agree with you, but I've also never seen a famous person holding a "junk $200 guitar"

Allow me to introduce you to your first sir.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CI5p79rDr0M

Ah, yes, the Jackson DINKY. Reminds me a bit of those cheap RG guitars along with the MikRo.

Ah, yes, the Jackson DINKY. Reminds me a bit of those cheap RG guitars along with the MikRo.

except those Ibanez guitars are knocked off of the Dinky.... the Dinky goes way back and was a really high end guitar when I was a kid

Personally, I'd still like to know what Rob thinks of it. I'd still get value out of him saying, "This is Junk, and you should probably go with something else."

What do you think?

From what I see, those Dinky's and cheap RG's are blank portraits waiting for a painting.

I'd probably torch a black one and put some EMG's with an extra Afterburner...

I am just sad that Jackson's low end has sunk so low, now the only Jacksons worth a damn are bespoke 'custom shop' models. I briefly had a really nice Jackson V, made in the USA. Not my cup of tea but a fabulous shred guitar for under a grand. When I encounter a used, modern Jackson custom from the USA shop I play it to see if its any better than that off the shelf V it is and its just not any better. Jackson really went the path of Hamer but to an even greater extent.

I am still waiting for a famous musician to do a demo video of "a cheap $200 guitar." Are these guys famous musicians? I don't think so ... maybe I'm wrong. I do not consider "youtube stars" to be famous musicians. I am thinking of people like Eric Johnson, Robben Ford, Steve Vai, or ... ugh this is difficult to type .. Joe Bonnamassa (sp?).

Slash and the Epiphone AFD