This is a good example of a "simple" problem which is easy to describe to very difficult to solve, and I don't see a direct solution but will put somethings here since this question was bumped.
In the communication systems world, there is a notion of interference cancellation. The idea is that a transmitter is trying to communicate with a receiver but there may also be some interference signal(s). You could model like so:
$ r(t) = s(t) + i(t) + w(t) $
where $s(t)$ is the "signal of interest" (your music without the snare drum), $i(t)$ is the interference signal(s) (the snare drum), and $w(t)$ is the noise. Interference cancellation is the process of, at the receiver, estimating the interference, re-creating it, and subtracting it from $r(t)$ so that hopefully you are left with only $s(t)+w(t)$. But, because the cancellation is not perfect, ie. the interference signal is not perfectly re-created, you are actually left with $s(t)+(i(t)-\hat{i}(t))+w(t)$, where $\hat{i}(t)$ is the estimated interference.
This sort of thing seems to suit your needs, so what is the problem? This interference cancellation technique relies heavily, almost entirely, on being able to very accurately estimate the interference signal parameters. And the estimation relies heavily on being able to write out equations for the interference signal. This is something that would be hard to do for a snare drum (I would think), and would give a weird sounding result.
Another option, perhaps if you observe the snare drum occupies frequencies that the rest of the music does not, you may try filtering. I don't think this would be very promising though.
Something else: place the drummer far enough away from the rest of the band, setup your recording studio with a microphone array and place a nice null in the direction of the drummer!...