Getting back to the O.P.'s question, I have seen the "private party" model work well in the new age/contemporary music sphere. Musician/composers with a strong internet presence will solicit home concerts from their fans. David Nevue, for example, will issue email newsletters to his customers/fans, and say something like "I'll be in the southwest the month of May, so anybody wanting to host a home concert please contact me."

It seems to work well for him. So the advice I would give you is for your client to develop a website or Facebook page or the like and solicit the home concerts that way.

Yes...Home concerts are a big thing now...a sidestep from having to deal with venues, promoters, agents, etc.

.....and Carnigie Hall is such a hassle anymore, esp with parking and all.

I actually like the idea of touring the pianos of working artists. I have had thoughts of organizing something like this in New York City, though not to feature the talents of any one artist...just for the edification of other pianists. Because I think pianists are generally interested in what other pianists like about their instruments.

It would be a pretty exclusive tour...not a mass market event. But for those of us in our niche, very interesting.

On the whole though, a rather different concept from what the OP is proposing...

Since the question asked was a general one(without giving the pianist's name), I don't think any rules were broken or commercial enterprises promoted. It's no different from when someone asks "What is the best way to sell my piano(as long as details about the particular piano are not given)?" or a tech asks "What is the best way to get new customers". I find most of the criticism of the OP by a few posters to be rather mean spirited and inappropriate.

The only thing the OP should do that he hasn't done so far is include his professional music affiliations in his signature.

I'm sure the manager would give the pianist's name and would discuss the pianists credentials/experience with anyone who might want to host a home recital. So it seems to me that the recitalist would not be a stranger.

I agree that some of the responses were inappropriate, in particular the triumphant disclosure of the poster's identity!!! I happen to agree that he presented himself poorly to say the least, but I don't think it warranted having someone track the poster and identify him!
Perhaps PianogirlNW could explain why she felt the need to breach the poster's privacy and how she did it. It would seem that he had not included any hints in his profile and perhaps she resorted to "clever" means of "busting" him. IMHO PW should not condone this approach. But again, perhaps I am missing something here.

A simple google search on his username returns those results. Of course, there is the possibility that there are several (chibi-whatever)s. PW does condone it with a google search box right on this very site (in your upper left hand corner)

I (?naively) assumed that he would have put that information up if he wanted to. Plus Pianogirl sounded so triumphant, I assumed that she must have tracked his IP address then his likedin profile.
By "condoning" I did not mean the specific technical means, as I suspect you know, bur rather the involuntary disclosure of personal info, regardless of the complexity of the means used to obtain it.

When OP first proposed his tour of private homes I and others felt the tone of the post was not genuine. When others asked for clarification he didn't provide any. When I googled his PF name, I found a number of social media websites that linked his name to his identity. When anyone opens a Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and blogs on the internet, the information posted on it is public. The info I posted was from his LinkedIn account. Some of his other websites/blogs showed no signs of interest, personal or professional, in the piano.

So was that not a good thing to reveal his identity? Maybe it wasn't. I do remember earlier when people were annoyed with BachRach (?) posting terrible recordings, that his identity was revealed and discussed.

Exactly. I would consider Pianogirl's actions far more egregious than the OP's. IF the moderators think the OP's post or the this thread should be closed, they will do so and communicate with the OP.

I think you have indeed missed a little something.

Besides that the basic thing he was doing was arguably borderline inappropriate (we could argue that either way), he presented the situation misleadingly and manipulatively, and so I'd say he was asking big-time for whatever he got. As Pianogrl said, his approach wasn't genuine -- which I think is an understatement; it was entirely ungenuine, and I'd say sleazy.

I wouldn't have gone and found and posted his identity either, but I can't believe you're finding it in you to criticize the person who did that and being so relatively gentle on the OP.

I think it is naive, and no offense to you or Pianoloverus who replied below (I think it is a general disinterest in the inner workings of computers). He Superchibi chose to apply the same username on several accounts of which some record is public. What pianogrl did was possibly the most rudimentary of inquiries that could be made. It is probably mostly Superchibi who is naive if he cared about his anonymity.

I couldn't disagree more. The only think the OP should have done was include his professional affiliation in his signature. If the thread was not appropriate, the mods would probably have closed it a while ago.

None taken. But it is rather smug of you to assume that we "don't get it" or that we are technologically-speaking naive. What I objected to is the "busted!!!"-decorated revelation of his identity, as sanction for his perceived manipulation of the esteemed forum. Granted said revelation happened to be a rudimentary google search away, since the OP used the smae username (allegedly) on sites that easily identify him. Perhaps he does not even care about his identity being included in the thread.
What I am objecting to is the approach. We all know that our identities are not secure, even if we take the trouble of using differnt usernames or even avoiding social and professional media. Let alone if we publish our identities along with an easily identifiable username. I still find it unsavory to get back at people (because that is what this is) by "busting" them.

Perhaps the manner in which I posed the question led you to believe that I thought Pianogirl was a professional hacker. In which case I forgive your inoffensive accusation.

Bottom line: it is poor decorum, regardless of who the poster is (and I certainly was not on the verge of offering my piano for a private party), and how easily they vould be revealed.

We weren't being smug but are sometimes of the belief that the opposite is true, that some folks don't learn certain new things on purpose. We'll grant that the revelation was maybe somewhat unsavory, but we think the OP deserved it.

If anything, there is an 'otherworldly' quality to the OP's original post that I feel empathy for. Many members here only come here to play. The OP came here aksing for help which sounded genuine to me. I feel we should give the OP the benefit of doubt.

I, too, would like to know this.

Thanks for giving us the plural of "meme."


And don't think I hadn't noticed that!


You're ignoring how he presented it.

He masqueraded the title, the post, and himself for other than what this was.

The whole thing was full of crapola -- a fake representation of what this was. If you didn't notice it or don't care about it, it doesn't mean it wasn't there.

I am late reading into this thread. My first thought is why did you people even respond in the first place if you thought the OP had malicious intentions? I personally don't see much wrong with his question. He could have been more clear in the beginning of what he was asking, but I don't think he was trying to solicit business from this website.
After seeing things like this, when new people come to this website and think of joining, some of them may have second thoughts when they see just how petty some of the members can be. And even worse, they may fear their identities will be outed.
You know not everyone is computer savy, even now. Maybe he had no idea that his ID could be traced through his screenname on here. I feel that was a major invasion of privacy and I think it's even more disturbing the way you people condone that kind of behavior but attack someone who asks a question. Obviously some people here have their little cliques and will basically do anything to support there "friends" on here. And where are the moderators? From what I read the OP had asked this thread to be closed early on (before his ID had been given), this should not have happened.

I am actually fed up here and I won't be participating on this website any more.

If you look at who he is and what he does, including on the internet (all of which you can see with very little effort, inside of half a minute), I think you'll realize it's essentially impossible that he was naive or unaware in the way that you said -- which would seem to negate your point. That said, I hope you won't really leave. It wouldn't be for a good reason.

As Kreisler has explained more than once, the chances of a thread getting closed depends greatly on whether anyone complains about it, regardless of the content.

I feel like I've stepped into the Twilight Zone.

Late to the party, as usual, but I'm happy with a few crumbs.

This thread seems to be a study in overreactions. Initially the OP laid all his cards on the table: My artist wants to play privately-owned, high-quality pianos for money. How might I go about discovering who and where these owners are? I didn't sense in any of his posts that he was hawking his wares. He seemed to be simply asking "how should I begin?".

I guess one could infer that he was really asking "Anyone on this forum interested?", but he didn't say that. (Although stores' "Show me the goods" may have raised his hopes for a microsecond ). But even if we assume this guy really was a snake, I'm sure he would have revealed himself in due course. Instead, after introducing his topic, he was promptly greeted with a bat across the knee caps, effectively shutting down both the topic and the OP.

On the other hand, I would also say that anyone with a smidgen of tech savvy knows that any presumption of internet anonymity is a fantasy. The fact that the poster has Facebook and LinkedIn accounts, and claims to be an audio engineer, would suggest that he's anything but a Luddite. And given that he fancies himself a kind of manager/agent/promoter, he would probably welcome as much visibility as possible. So Pianogrl was in no way "invading his privacy" by googling his name, because no privacy ever existed. His cyber-trail is available to anyone, and I'm sure he's well aware of that.

What seemed to end his presence on the thread was Pianogrl's use of the word "busted", which usually implies wrongdoing on the part of the "bustee". Within minutes the OP says, "This was a mistake", and hasn't been heard from since. He seemed to sense the hostility, which was palpable at that point, and realized the futility of continuing.

Personally, I wish the thread had been allowed to evolve. I had never heard of the concept being proposed by the OP, and found it somewhat intriguing. Given that it's impossible to ascribe motives to people who are physically in our presence, I think it's even more foolish to try doing it in such a woefully inadequate medium as this. We're all adults, so I'm sure we can probably figure out at what point the evidence of ulterior motives becomes incontrovertible. But I think we were a long way from that point, and that the OP should have been given the benefit of the doubt, unless and until he proved otherwise. He didn't really have a chance to prove anything, one way or the other.

I think it's one thing to google someone's name but a different thing to start posting information about someone (no matter how easy or difficult the information was to find).

I do agree with the part of your post that said the OP was treated in a nasty way by a few people who continued complaining even when the OP explained (in his second post) the situation in complete detail. One poster even continued alluding to the "problem" on another thread.

I don't see the "complete detail" that you have apparently read.


The reason I posted as I did for my first post on this thread was after reading and trying to digest all the implications of the following :



What I was questioning - and what has not yet been made clear - is the nature of this “tour” the type of which the OP and other(s - “we”) have often done before.

1) These “tours” or “events” or “shows” as he has called them, are they arranged for groups of people with a common interest assembled by the OP - as in themed travel tours - or is the tour arranged only for the OP and his pianist?
2) The OP expects his artist to be paid. I read this to mean that the piano host will be paying the artist for his performance(s).
3) Private parties? Are the guests to the private party simply the OP and his pianist, do they include friends of the host, or are the guests the members of the “tour” (see 1) or all of these?
4) Whatever the answer to 3), I take it that the OP expects that not only his artist to be paid but also for the host to fund the “private party.”

This is why, perhaps in my naïveté, or lack of understanding of the details, I thought it somewhat presumptuous of the OP to be expecting to find someone who would
- host and pay his pianist to play a privately-owned piano in a private home
- host and fund a private party for the OP, his pianist and ... how many others?

While many owners of high-end pianos may own them only as pieces of furniture (alas!), I would think that most would be fairly fine pianists themselves and would also have sufficient musical connections to hear their piano played as often as they would like. Why would they jump at the chance to pay for a private party at which someone is to be paid to play their piano?

Would the shoe not fit better on the other foot? Shouldn't the OP and his artist be eager to pay to play high end pianos of people they don't know and who don't know them?

What have I missed in all of this?

Regards,

Why would the OP not post an audio of this 'artist' to gain some interest in thos with 'high end' pianos to prove that it might be worth it. I thought his post rather awkward and ill-conceived but I don't see how it violated anything other than the sensibilities of the subsequent posters who have valid arguments, so I think.

It could have been more carefully thought out so that the poster would have been less offensive. Well, he knows the response here. I think the discovery and revelation of his name ok. Had he been more straight-forward he wouldn't have created these responses I think.

Ralph

My choice of words was poor. What I meant was that in his third post very near the beginning of the threadfirst post( he said"convince them to pay my artistt to play on their pianos for a private party") the OP confirmed he was the agent/manager for the pianist who was expecting to perform for money. Thus the complaining from some others about this should have endednever occurred..

To comment on the rest of your post, it is quite common for non classical performers to perform at private parties, and I have seen musicians' websites that advertize this service. It is probably less common for classical performers to do so but not unheard of.

I think if he had done that it would have been considered free advertizing which is against PW rules.

Similarly starting a thread asking about how to sell one's piano seems reasonable, but including great detail about that piano(make, year, condition, possible price, etc.)seems like advertising.

Bruce, you've made my point beautifully. You're not the only one "missing" something. We've all "missed" something because the OP never felt comfortable enough to begin addressing the many excellent questions you posed.

The concept outlined by the OP is so strange, maybe even bizarre, that reading the OP's proof of concept might have made for some fascinating, if not downright entertaining give-and-take. But since his integrity was impugned so early in the thread, he abandoned ship, so your questions will have to remain unanswered. It's not the end of the world, but I do wish these threads could be allowed to develop on their own for a while before the "serious police" come in and run the OP out of town on a rail.