iTunes Uncovers Musical Hoax 311
holy_calamity writes "The reliance by iTunes on the CDDB has burst open a musical fraud in the usually staid world of classical piano. Albums by the much vaunted British pianist Joyce Hatto, who died in June 2006, are identified by the iTunes player as belonging to other performers. A more scientific analysis by an audio remastering firm has found that none of Hatto's works appear to be hers. Her husband, who produced all her albums, says he 'cannot explain' the similarities."
What is that? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What is that? (Score:5, Funny)
They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Okay, it wasn't that great, but you already took the obvious ones. It was very Strauss-ful coming up with new ones.
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
That's because music today is kind of weak. Why isn't Rachmaninoff to admit that classical is better?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Woo - craptacular
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Now just a minuet, don't be hasty.
Re:They may be .... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
live performances? (Score:5, Insightful)
As for the husband, either he recorded her playing in a studio, or he didn't. I don't see how you can mistake that and claim "I dunno how this happened."
Basically he's been busted and he's lying to save his ass.
Tom
Re:live performances? (Score:5, Informative)
She stopped playing in public in the 1970s, having never attained much prominence as an artist. The retired critic James Methuen-Campbell heard two of her recitals in London's Wigmore Hall and recalls a pianist with an efficient and careful technique, but with an inability to convey the overall conception of a major work. Her approach, in his opinion, concentrated on detail.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm studying piano now [admitedly I'm still newb-like] but I don't see the point in fraud. I play because I like the sound and the ability to vent feelings [both positive and negative] through the instrument. Faking it would just defeat the purpose of playing in the first place.
Tom
Re: (Score:2)
Plus it's just uncool to rip others work for profit. Music, despite the bad rep, isn't easy. Takes a lot of practice and patience to get any good at it, and to just rip someone off, ain't cool.
Tom
Re:live performances? (Score:5, Funny)
1. Produce fraudulent recordings
2. Sell the fraudulent recordings
3. Profit!
Re:live performances? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:live performances? (Score:5, Funny)
Meh. We're slashdotters. How the hell do WE know if a woman is faking something?
Re:live performances? (Score:5, Funny)
Answer: if she's interacting with us with anything other than annoyance and/or disgust?
Re: (Score:2)
If it's even remotely possible for a woman to fake "something", you are not doing it right.
Re:live performances? (Score:5, Interesting)
Girl, you know it's
Girl, you know it's
Girl, you know it's
Girl, you know it's
Ashlee Simpson can hodown too
Bill says (Score:2, Funny)
Why iTunes? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why iTunes? (Score:5, Informative)
So no, not iTunes directly, but since it is the Windows of music management applications it was in the right place at the right time. Also recall that these are music people and we are geeks. We may know all about CDDB and music players and which bit of software performs which task, but most normals don't know or care. Even if you try to explain it to them they will stare off in the distance, blankly, wishing they were listening to a modified version of Nojima being passed off as Hatto playing Liszt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is the equivalent of Sherlock Holmes coming to down and solving a previously unsolved crime - and the townspeople congratulating the horse that drew the carriage.
Re:Why iTunes? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, neither iTunes nor CDDB caught it. The person who put the CD in caught it, when he realized that the data CDDB/iTunes returned wasn't for the CD he'd put in, but was close enough in content that he was intrigued enough to do an a/b comparison.
I'm betting a bunch of other people saw the same thing, and either didn't correct it, or said "huh" and just "corrected" the artist's name based on what they thought it was supposed to be, assuming the data in CDDB was wrong.
So kudos to the guy who noticed!
No, really *WHY* iTunes? (Score:4, Informative)
If any independent research was done that shows the critic used iTunes then I have no problem, but New Scientist doesn't indicate that they did anything other than read the Gramophone and Pristine articles. Where the hell did they suddenly get iTunes?
Re:Why iTunes? (Score:5, Informative)
It doesn't do any real music analysis like Musicbrainz('audio checksums') or even Pandora(manualy defined audio qualities)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
as far as I remember, CDDB goes only by track lengths. Works some of the times, but is really a crapshoot (hence genre splitting to lower overlap).
It doesn't do any real music analysis like Musicbrainz('audio checksums') or even Pandora(manualy defined audio qualities)
there was an earlier article on Slashdot [slashdot.org] that said otherwise. from that article [wired.com] :
Although the idea of using track times to identify discs existed before CDDB's time, the real trick is in using that information to find discs quickly and accurately. For some twisted reason, each time a new batch of CDs is manufactured, the factory makes a new master that often has timings slightly different from previous batches of the same disc. (I think there is a Linkin Park disc in our database with over 1,000 different TOCs.) .
It's a black art, and involves layers of hashing, fuzzy logic and other matching methods to ensure quality results. This is what Gracenote has mastered, and is far more important than just the lone idea of using track times to identify discs.
As far as acoustic recognition, Gracenote has two types of audio recognition. The simpler one is used for identifying audio files, and helps audio software catalog your music collection. The other, heavier method is very tolerant of background noise. .
The MySpace story shows one of the many ways we use this technology. One of the coolest applications is the ability to identify a song over a cell phone. We're also starting to identify music used in old TV shows, so that the rights holders/artists can be paid back royalties, as well as monitoring live radio/TV broadcasts.
Who would've thought... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Who would've thought... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now... how do you keep the wafers from disintegrating?
Re: (Score:2)
Least, that's how similar stuff is made.
Re:Who would've thought... (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
a Milli Vanilli flavor - fudge and Nilla wafers (which contain no vanilla at all).
Perhaps also using a carob bean based fudge?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I see what you're getting at, but really, they will probably want the stuff to actually sell
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a classical musician... (Score:2)
Sounds like her husband was no stranger to Pro Tools...
No matter how well known a classical musician is, there will not be 1/40th the amount of recording sales that your average pop "artist" generates on a given album. Remember Milli Vanilli?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I'm a classical musician... (Score:5, Funny)
but then again, there are a ton of pianists out there.
Wait... so there are only between 10 and 20 pianists out there?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
How convenient! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Come on now (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Blind music critics? (Score:5, Insightful)
This confirms my belief that music critics are mostly full of shit. If those recordings were so good, then the artists she copied from were obviously superb. However, one was apparently a very obscure Japanese pianist, so his brilliance wasn't recognized, and since no-one noticed the copy for so long, the others can't have been very prominent either.
Re: (Score:2)
So, to answer your question, I would guess that the original performers did all have brilliant performances, but none gained prominence - sort of like one shot wonders in the classical world. I wouldn't expect anyone to have memorized them, even if they were great performances . . .
Re:Blind music critics? (Score:5, Insightful)
These are people playing the same music, there are only so many things you can do to detect fakes, and I also doubt that anyone was looking for them before now. It'd be like detecting a brightness, contrast, color adjusted, and cropped version of a photo from thousands of photos against the same scene when you had no expectation that there even was a dupe.
Re:Blind music critics? (Score:5, Funny)
This is slashdot. We're trained to be alert to those all the time.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
At some point, it would be easier to just play the piano.
Re:Blind music critics? (Score:5, Interesting)
This confirms my belief that music critics are mostly full of shit. If those recordings were so good, then the artists she copied from were obviously superb. However, one was apparently a very obscure Japanese pianist, so his brilliance wasn't recognized, and since no-one noticed the copy for so long, the others can't have been very prominent either.
Well, in the case of Minoru Nojima (the "very obscure Japanese pianist,") any critics would not have been wrong in recognizing that the playing was obviously superb, even if they couldn't discern who the actual pianist was. "Nojima Plays Liszt" is a wonderful CD, with a combination of both masterful playing and excellent sound quality. Too bad Nojima is as obscure as he is to the general public -- he just hasn't recorded much. But that just makes it all the more special to me that I got to see him play in a small junior college auditorium just minutes from my house!
Re:Blind music critics? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I'll preface this by saying I'm a music grad student, so I'm more than a little conversant with the world of classical music, although I'm a string player, not a pianist.
One of my profs in undergrad (who was a pianist) told me once that good pianists are a dime a dozen. And they're all making recordings. The Pristine Classical website has quite a few possible/probable rip-offs listed, and in most cases they are pianists I've never heard of (of course, I wasn't familiar with Joyce Hatto either). This is
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Disclaimer: I'm a violinist. </flamebait>
Metamusic (Score:5, Funny)
It's become self-aware!!
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but all it wants to do is talk about how much your favorite band sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
The husband should just call it fan fiction... (Score:5, Funny)
Really, the two of them were the biggest fans of the artists whose work they fair-used. They did this as an homage. Yeah. That's the ticket.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If only they had stuck to Open Source Classical Music.
this sort of abuse... (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, there must be thousands of recordings of the transcendental etudes (I have several in my cd case, alone) spanning probably 100 years or so. Classical musicians often listen to recordings of the piece they're working on to get ideas on interpretation.
Imagine if you had thousands of bands playing the same song, and using the same instrumentation - I'm willing to bet I could copy one of the renditions... change the mp3 info, and no one would notice the duplicate. It's not that amazing of a story, really. I suspect her husband told her that he would touch up her recordings to make them sound better. I doubt she wanted this, but who knows? Anyway, it sounds like a few minutes work on pro tools or some other DAW. Heck, Audacity would suffice for this sort of thing, I would imagine.
Re:this sort of abuse... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
National Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra
http://www.stereophile.com/news/021907hatto/ [stereophile.com]
OT (Score:2)
Also, the story is pretty funny.
Something's not right here... (Score:3, Interesting)
from the newscientist article: "To identify albums it calculates a 'discid' from the duration of the tracks and then connects to the Compact Disc Database online."
From the scientific analysis: "for ten of the twelve tracks on this CD." "Simon recording has been time-shrunk by 0.02%" and "Nojima time-stretched by 0.975%"
Ok, seems to me that the discid is calculated using ALL of the tracks, and yet not all of the tracks were from the same source - So how did the exact CD she ripped from get ID'd?
Also, the time-stretching should have effected the durations, and generated different IDs. For example, the track she supposedly stole from Nojima: the duration of her track was 3'33", meaning that with 0.975% time-stretching the original must have been 3'38". Assuming digital hashing is involved in creating the discid, this should be more than enough of a difference to create a substantially different id.
I'm not saying that iTunes didn't uncover the difference, and I'm not claiming she didn't fake it, but... I seriously doubt that all the information here about how discid's are calculated/obtained is 100% correct. Anyone know more info about how this works, or how iTunes could still have uncovered the fraud?
Re:Something's not right here... (Score:5, Interesting)
What I believe happened is that someone already figured this out and changed the artist and song titles _for that cd_ in cddb. Then this person comes along and pops in the cd and it pulls down the scandalous info and they think they're onto something....
There is no way iTunes is actually doing song fingerprinting to figure out what the songs are. I mean, maybe, but I really doubt it.
If you go read the Wikipedia article on the pianist it says that this was all figured out by a couple of groups at universities. So I think the timeline goes like this:
1. Someone thinks it is a fake.
2. University group studies it and finds it is a fake.
3. CDDB gets updated so the correct musicians names are attached to the work.
4. Person comes along and pops in a CD and "finds" a scandal...
Friedmud
She's in trouble now, the RIAA are after her (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Not that I disbelieve the evidence (Score:2, Interesting)
Google Book Search Library Project (Score:2, Interesting)
Free CDDB (Score:5, Informative)
This kind of read/write database population collaboration is now well known, both in blogs and in more sophisticated databases like Wikipedia. But in the late 1990s it was revolutionary.
Then the CDDB server owners sold out to Gracenote. Gracenote required a login to access the data, which login they supplied only to licensed users. Gracenote first tried to sell CD players integrated with the CDDB, but then found more success in licensing access to iTunes and other online music distributors.
But neither Gracenote nor the CDDB programmers had produced the profitable data. The people who had were locked out. So some new programmers made a new version with the identical API and DB structure, the FreeDB [freedb.org], then datamined the CDDB to populate it. The FreeDB and its contents are GPL, so they cannot be "taken proprietary" (stolen) again. The data is free again, as is the life of this pioneering colalborative project.
If you are generating music metadata, consider submitting it to the FreeDB [freedb.org]. And try to use the FreeDB, rather than the privateer CDDB, to support you applications. And send money to the FreeDB operators whenever you can, especially if you use it.
Unfortunately, FreeDB sucks (Score:2)
So look at MusicBrainz (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Glenn Gould is still safe (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just get in the habit of humming along with your playing, quite loudly at times, off-key. All that's left is learning to play the pieces gorgeously and with deep, deep feeling. Should be a good project for the weekend.
Re:Glenn Gould is still safe (Score:5, Funny)
You can if you use the Glenn Gould De-Vocalizer 2000! [unpronounceable.com] I mean, listen to the difference in this after-and-before recording! [unpronounceable.com]
BBC radio4 has a streaming interview (Score:2, Informative)
Collisions happen (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Internet phenomenon (Score:5, Interesting)
Before those Hatto recordings were on the radar of the professional reviewing magazines in the UK, the entire promotion for these CDs was done on rec.music.classical recordings by the two shills and on the website of a CD retailer with a close affiliation to the record producers. People were praising the CDs into the sky and the exclusive retailer is a regular on the newsgroup, too.
This thing had SCAM written all over it, but overcoming groupthink in the presence of two shills is difficult. Godwin's law,you know.
It's hilarious to see the two shills in action: The one is a loud, foulmouthed ex-classical-music-producer from Canada and the other one an English gentleman with impeccable style, manners and a deep love for classical music. What they staged was drama on a very high level, flaming residents into the ground at the slightest hint of a suspicion as to the authenticity of the recordings. Anything from Jew to Nazi was good enough to be hurled at the detractors of the holy trinity of Hatto, Barrington-Coup and Music.
They almost murdered me when I told the group that the whole thing was a total fake, based on all the oddities that I named.
Re:Internet phenomenon (Score:4, Informative)
No, but I've got keywords for you:
Hatto, Deacon, Watkins, Lemken, Köhler
Search within rec.music.classical.recordings
Re:Internet phenomenon (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems that df5jt is Peter Lemkin.
A usenet flamewar with conspiracy theorists, and then the conspiracy theorists are proved right! The end of the world is nigh!
Re: (Score:2)
It's the thing you use to tag your music.
Re:Acronyms (Score:5, Funny)
The majority understand what CDDB is...if nothing else, you should at least be able to figure out what it STANDS for. Just to help you out, I'll break it down for you:
CD. DB.
Need further assistance?
Re:Acronyms (Score:4, Funny)
Yeah? But what does "STANDS" mean?
Re:Acronyms (Score:5, Funny)
TWAIN (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
More Acronyms (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
After the first CD, the investigators went out looking for older recordings to match. In these they found some with shifts as high as 15%. CDDB was no longer being used as an analysis tool; they were directly comparing the sampled data from the two sources, adjusting the time shifts until the measured aligned.
The other group that found a match (linked on