I have had this sort of discussion with a lot of my techs - the nature of where I am at the moment, a lot of the guys we get have only had 1 or 2 jobs before this one and very few have been in industry related jobs. We do corporate AV, so rostering is 24/7 as needed. For those who have never done corporate it is a big shock & no amount of explaining in an interview can really do it justice - some jobs just don't fit everyone.
Our company pay slightly less than a lot of other companies in the same industry around here as well, but we enforce some fairly strict work-time rules that others don't (12hr maximum shifts, minimum 10 hour break between shifts etc). Pay is normally the reason our guys want to go ($3 more an hour with a different company sounds great!) and the ridiculous shifts is generally why they come back.
When I end up having the "is this the right place for me" talks with people I usually encourage people to really think about both why it works and why it doesn't - and it seems that is what you are going through now. My motto is that whilst the grass may look greener on the other side of the fence, it is usually just a different brand of manure - if that manure works better for you, then jump the fence.
All jobs are about balance - the money versus the time commitments verses the scheduling versus the personalities you have to deal with versus the amount of bureaucracy etc - and all of these items are highly subjective and weighted differently - the old decision making trick of "count the pro's, count the con's which ever has more, wins" does not work - because one major con may be enough to sour the entire experience - just as one major pro may negate a whole bunch of cons.
It seems like you weighted the scheduling as very important to you, over and above the fulfilling nature of the show - now you need to decide (after doing a season) whether that weighting is correct or whether you need to put more of an emphasis on the show.
From a management side of things, if you give every employee a rating from -1 to 2 (1 being does the work of 1 person, -1 being major obstacle that creates enough work to almost justify employing another person) - dissatisfied workers are rarely more than a 0.7 on a value scale - so keeping employees satisfied is a big thing - If I could get every employee in my venue working hard like fully satisfied employees I could probably drop my labour requirements by 1/3. If your dissatisfaction with the role is impacting the quality of your work, despite the convenience of the scheduling, the bigest favour you can do to the theatre (and for yourself) is not working together again unless you can be sure you will be satisfied.