so it would appear that we've all been duped rather significantly, at least if the number of locked threads in the audition room is to be believed. while I can wonder at one's motivations for perpetuating such a ruse, it does make me ponder a few things. first off, a forum such as this is a prime target for such a thing. after all, no credentials are required to post a recording, nor is payment of any sort. the only barrier is the effort that it takes to find a sham recording, doctor it slightly, and then upload it. quite simply, to do so would be very easy if someone were so motivated. furthermore, we the readers very much want to believe what we are presented here. we want to think that everyone posting here is exactly what they say to be, because that's the nature of the community. "who has a reason to lie?" we ask ourselves, "what could they possibly gain?" and the story of an undiscovered artistic genius waiting in the wings of the internets is a charming one to us, akin to the frequent discoveries of "new" works by Jackson Pollock or the like.
at least a little of this episode is probably directed at the critiques that the members here post on various recordings. the quality of these comments is highly variable, as is the quality of the recordings. I'm sure that some trickster somewhere takes great pleasure in seeing the members of pianostreet critique a fraud in all seriousness. but perhaps I'm the only one who has seen a similar device used in English comparative lit classes: teacher takes an obscure passage by a famous author, instructs class to critique it, they tear it apart, dissect its every little flaw and then pronounce it unpublishable, teacher says "gotcha" and reveals it to be from the middle of Great Expectations or the like, and chides the students for being so willing to tear down the great master. but to this device I say pshaw, as the teacher invited criticism, as do the people who post their recordings here. and honestly, has anyone read the reviews in the NYTimes of various performances or restaurants? pretty serious stuff there, for very high quality products.
anyway, in retrospect I too thought that there was something too good to be true about all of the involved charlatans. becky had way too much emotional maturity for a 12 year old, and far more repertoire than is realistic, even for a very talented one enroute early to a conservatory. ladypianist had far too good a recording setup for someone so supposedly unsophisticated with computers. and roger's draconian lesson plan (a year of scales before touching any music?) was too much to believe. furthermore, he didn't even respond at all to my little military in-jokes, something that is a universal sign of fraud (someone google "fast neat average friendly good good" if they want an interesting aside).
so, I'm glad that this little fracas didn't scare off too many people. I still won't question the source of things on this website too much, because after all it is an anonymous internet forum. and eventually, I still hope to have a recording worthy of a mini-masterclass from birba, but it's gonna be a while before I get anything to that level. now I'm off to work on a presentation for work. lame.
Topic: hoaxes