Joyce Hatto hoax story

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:30 am

Has anyone heard about this strange and interesting hoax?

http://www.pristineclassical.com/More/About.html

Pretty funny, actually, and anyone who's ever recorded with a DAW will be nodding their head in agreement when they read some of this. Looks like they used Adobe Audition to discredit some of the works. (No idea what the perpetrators used in the first place....)

http://www.pristineclassical.com/HattoHoax.html

and this, from the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/17/arts/music/17hatt.html?_r=1&ref=arts&oref=slogin

Posted: Tue Feb 20, 2007 12:13 pm

I just learned of this yesterday. Someone is in big trouble.

Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 12:13 am

Stripping away Millie Vanillie's last claim to fame as the most succesful con-job in media.

Posted: Wed Feb 21, 2007 2:16 am

That's pretty remarkable. If proven, is this sort of thing only a matter of royalties and/or monies, or could someone be up for jailtime over this?

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 7:18 am

Two questions......

1) Why would anyone go to such lengths to steal from other performers? (If that indeed is the case and I have to assume that it is after reading the articles) Was it for money or to prove that his wife was a very gifted pianist? If it is true that they were stolen then how did they possibly think that this would not be found out?

2) Why would anyone devote so much of their time and website to debunking this? What is to be gained from this? If this somehow goes to court and the court finds in favor of the Concert Artists claims (which I doubt) then Pristine Audio could be sued BIG TIME!

Interesting topic and thanks to JoeH for bringing it up.....

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:47 am

Quote:

Why would anyone devote so much of their time and website to debunking this?

gramaphone magazine "asked" (commisioned? paid job?) pristine audio to investigate... apparently they were themselves instrumental in her late but sudden recognition. here is their article:

http://www.gramophone.co.uk/newsMainTemplate.asp?storyID=2759&newssectionID=1

FWIW,

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:48 am

Thomas W. Bethel wrote:

If this somehow goes to court and the court finds in favor of the Concert Artists claims (which I doubt) then Pristine Audio could be sued BIG TIME!

No KIDDING!

That's why, whenever I do forensic work, I make sure the client signs a waiver stating (among other things) that I am making no assertions or assumptions based on the work, merely providing the forensic adjustments at their request.

Fortunately, I've never had to testify yet...

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 11:58 am

1) Why would anyone go to such lengths to steal from other performers? (If that indeed is the case and I have to assume that it is after reading the articles) Was it for money or to prove that his wife was a very gifted pianist? If it is true that they were stolen then how did they possibly think that this would not be found out?

Perhaps it was one of those odd, strange things (like not returning a library book for days...then it becomes weeks....then months...then years..) and suddenly you've got this horrible secret or situation where there's no going back. Perhaps the guy thought he was justified in doing this "for" is wife's memory. Maybe she was good, but never quite THAT good, but COULD have been, etc. etc. and perhaps he was giving her her shot postumously.

Or maybe it was simple greed; a way to make some bucks to pay the property taxes and take a vacation or two since his source of income dried up with her death. Dunno how medical bills work after someone dies over there, but perhaps he had a mountain of debt to pay off. One never knows....

2) Why would anyone devote so much of their time and website to debunking this? What is to be gained from this? If this somehow goes to court and the court finds in favor of the Concert Artists claims (which I doubt) then Pristine Audio could be sued BIG TIME!

I think this, in a way, puts Pristine Audio on the map. Not sure if they found it out themselves, or if someone came to them with the material to verify, but it's pretty cool how they figured it out. I poked around on their website (as anyone who wants to know more about them propbably will) and saw that they're a small botique-style recording & CD making company. (Kindred spirits!) I envied them just a tad, knowing that this article & story would probably generate a LOT of interest in their company.

I don't think they have anything to worry about legally, as long as what they have in front of them is provable in a court of law. Clearly, their stuff seems to hold up just fine. Ditto for the speed-change issue. (been there, done that...)

I too have done forensic work, and when presented properly (Wavefore printouts, good graphics, proper documentation), it's powerful stuff. Few attorneys are equipped to go up against it, if it's airtight. I recently analyzed some fire-alarm "Whoops" to prove (or disprove, I never found out) the veracity of a fire alarm sound - in the background - of a cell phone call to 911. I had to clean up the MP3 recording, and show how the pitch & type of warble was not the same as the one the slum-lord was claiming went off in a fire in one of his buildings - that killed two people in the process. (I felt like CSI! Heheheh)

Interesting topic and thanks to JoeH for bringing it up.....

Shucks, 'twas nuttin. I read it in my daily Arts Journal email.

And here's a tip for anyone who's bothered to visit this forum and read this thread: You can subscribe, for free, to a daily news journal specifically targeted to the ARTS world: Music, Dance, Theater, Paiting, Poetry, etc., all about Classical, Jazz, Modern and any other worthy medium. (They've just added video clips now, as well, and you can currently see Ethan Winer's incredible cello video from 2005.)

http://www.artsjournal.com/

Go here and register for their daily emails (it's FREE!) and you'll thank me later. Wink

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 1:10 pm

pretty pathetic... giving the guy benefit of the doubt i'm hoing it was to"honor"the wife.... when i saw it a day or two ago the thing i found interesting is by that account a guy "heard the original" despite a time change and some processing????

Posted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 3:37 pm

The world is full of hoaxes at present and this shows the lack of due diligence of researchers, reviewers and punters. The lack of solid accounts of live performances would have been a hint.

My father, a music academic, once told me that some students invented and wrote up a fake composer and the entry made it into some prominent references for a few editions.

We live in a world full of deception, hoax, and spurious facts. Its quite fun really. Smile

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:36 am

Thomas W. Bethel wrote:

2) ...If this somehow goes to court and the court finds in favor of the Concert Artists claims (which I doubt) then Pristine Audio could be sued BIG TIME!

FYI, the kind of litigation culture that has built the US Economy (buy suing just about anyone for anything) does not exist in europe, claims of this sort, if they rearly end up in court, usually settle for petty sums. So I fear that Mr Rose of Pristine Audio is quite safe.

BTW, as far as I understad, Prestine Audio (wich is a forensic audio lab and rerelease label of historical recordings) was approched by the Gramophone Magazine to investigate this fraud to begin with. Its continuence have avalanched thriough discussions on various usenet groups and the internet. Mostly through appaled customers of Concert Artist Records...

/ptr

Posted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:15 am

FYI - another thread - this one started by Mr. Rose.
http://www.audiomastersforum.net/amforum/index.php/topic,6071.0.html

Posted: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:48 am

This explains it all in graphic detail.....

http://www.gramophone.co.uk/newsMainTemplate.asp?storyID=2765&newssectionID=1

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2007 5:33 pm

And then some waveform editor owners, throw in evidence of wrong doing.

This one: http://www.box.net/public/k84vgh81i2 has uncovered more fraud.

This topic sponsored by: