Music is the highest art, it’s beyond art, it’s Devine communication, it’s sacred, the foundation of humanity.
So why do we keep using the word “gear” like we are rock climbing or something? It’s such a boring disposal word. You haul, sort, collect and load gear. It’s necessary items for work.
I play instruments like many of you, generally stringed things but I’ve learned to work a saxophone … each has a unique voice and personality as do all of our “boxes” full of electricity, microprocessors and whatever else the wizards put in there.
I feel like the word gear helps keep the commodity fetish culture going strong, and it’s getting worse not better. Because you can’t have too much gear! Got to be prepared! Buy gear!
When playing trombone and tuba in school nobody referred to it as gear. But as soon as I was out from under the auspices of school sponsored music making all music making items became gear. Didn’t matter what kind of band or genre or any of that.
I’m much more concerned with “song” vs “track” and “graphic novel” vs “comics”.
I think this is the biggest reason for using “gear”
So not the issue with commercialism but most of what gets used or discussed here is 1 part of a larger kit or rig.
I’ve heard it described this way from performing and recording musicians who use more than just a single instrument for their sound (additional sound sources, processing, effects, amps, etc…) for as many years as I can remember.
So in short, any problems alluded to in the OP are likely personal problems and nothing to do with using the word “gear.”
If I only played an acoustic piano and only ever played just one, I’d likely still call it gear when traveling, moving or just want to call it by a different name.
Just personally, I don’t have a mystical/artistic approach to music-making. It’s a technical process for me (& I like it that way) so “gear” is a more appropriate description than “instrument” for me. I’ve been making music since the mid 90s and by far my least productive period was when I tried to be “artistic”. Of course it’ll be different for other people, but there’s no one way to make music.
To me an instrument is something that requires you to play it more than program it while making music or afterwards. I have to do it for each piece separately, but for example the guitar to me is an instrument, but so is the Dreadbox Erebus. A mixer or a compressor is gear, but so is the OT or DT or Syntakt. OP-1 is an instrument in my mind, even though it has many other “gear” capabilities, I would call it more of an instrument. When talking for combined musical stuff that I have in my studio, I will always say gear, not instruments. If I go see a symphonic orchestra and see through cables and microphones on stage, I would call those instruments.
A musical instrument is a device created or adapted to make musical sounds. In principle, any object that produces sound can be considered a musical instrument—it is through purpose that the object becomes a musical instrument.
Hmmm…scientific instruments could be considered a type of gear also, but musical gear/instruments/whatever couldn’t be called scientific instruments unless they were different types of scopes/meters.
I consider machines to have particular functions, and elektron seems to as well, with their different machines (that serve particular functions) inside of a singular instrument/piece of gear.
Honestly though it’s probably all moot, and I personally think gear works well.
More directly on-topic, I feel like I sometimes use my Digitakt more like gear (as midi seqeuncer, hub for other synths, audio interface), and sometimes more like an instrument (sound shaping, creative uses of sequencer and effects, etc). That is, to me personally, gear connotes tech, and instrument creativity. I don’t think I’d ever call an audio interface an instrument, and a guitar would only be gear if I had a lot of them…
Or there’s the British way, to call everything a “piece of kit” (which sometimes also means “clothing”? Never not confused)