‘Bots’ That Siphon Off Tickets Frustrate Concert Promoters

That enemy is the bot.

“Bots,” computer programs used by scalpers, are a hidden part of a miserable ritual that plays out online nearly every week in which tickets to hot shows seem to vanish instantly.

Long a mere nuisance to the live music industry, these cheap and widely available programs are now perhaps its most reviled foe, frustrating fans and feeding a multibillion-dollar secondary market for tickets.

According to Ticketmaster, bots have been used to buy more than 60 percent of the most desirable tickets for some shows; in a recent lawsuit, the company accused one group of scalpers of using bots to request up to 200,000 tickets a day.

Ticketmaster and its parent company, Live Nation Entertainment, have stepped up efforts to combat bots, in part to improve the ticket-buying experience for concertgoers, but also to burnish the company’s reputation with consumers. The result has been a game of cat and mouse between the company and the bots.

“As with hackers, you can solve it today, and they’re rewriting code tomorrow,” said Michael Rapino, Live Nation’s chief executive. “Thus the arms race.”

In late 2011, Ticketmaster hired John Carnahan, an expert on machine learning who fought online advertising frauds at Yahoo, to lead its anti-bot effort.

By monitoring the behavior of each visitor to Ticketmaster’s site, the company can determine the likelihood of a customer being human or a machine. For example, a human may click a series of buttons at a range of speeds and in different spots on a screen, but bots can give themselves away by rapidly clicking on precisely the same spot each time.

A screen on Mr. Carnahan’s desk in Los Angeles shows Ticketmaster’s incoming traffic, with a rainbow of colors at the bottom and splotches of red on top representing suspicious activity. On a recent Thursday afternoon, the screen showed that the red visitors were making 600 times more ticket requests than those the system identified as being most likely human.

Bots are not kicked off the system, but rather “speedbumped” — slowed down, sent to the end of the line or given some other means of interference, to allow a regular customer through.

“We’re not trying to stop anybody from buying tickets,” Mr. Carnahan said. “We’re just trying to make sure that a fan can buy the tickets.”

Ticketing bots are often inexpensive and programmed in countries beyond easy reach of American law enforcement. Rob Rachwald of the computer security company FireEye, which is not working with Ticketmaster, points out that one site — available in English and Russian — charges just $13.90 for the keys to 10,000 Captchas, those squiggly lines that test whether a potential customer is human.

In January, Ticketmaster replaced most of its old Captchas with newer and more sophisticated versions. The company is also introducing a system for mobile devices that aims to eliminate Captcha-style tests altogether.

Live Nation will not say how many of the 148 million tickets it sells each year are bought using bots, and in many cases it may not know. Few ever admit to using the programs; official groups like the National Association of Ticket Brokers, which represents many of the biggest resellers, condemn them and say they support anti-bot measures. But people at nearly every level of the concert business blame bots for wreaking all kinds of economic havoc.

“There are sold-out shows in reserved-seat houses in New York City where we will have 20 percent no-show, and that 20 percent will be down in the front of the house,” said Jim Glancy of The Bowery Presents, an independent concert promoter in New York. “It’s speculators who bought a bunch of seats and didn’t get the price they wanted.”

Concert promoters, artist managers and ticketing services say that bots are now an ever-present force, not only during the high-traffic moments when a big show officially goes on sale, but also at the odd moments when a promoter releases a few dozen extra seats with no announcement.

Darlene Schild, of Lincroft, N.J., may well have experienced the reach of bots firsthand recently when she tried to buy Justin Bieber tickets as an 11th birthday present for her daughter. Like any well-trained concertgoer, she fired up Ticketmaster’s iPhone app just as the tickets went on sale, but after 15 fruitless minutes she gave up.

“The first thing that crossed my mind was that some ticket-buying service bought them all,” Ms. Schild said. “Or someone could dial quicker than me. Some technology — something.”

Last month, Ticketmaster sued 21 people in federal court, accusing them of fraud, copyright infringement and other offenses in using bots to search for millions of tickets over the last two years.

The legal status of bots is unclear. They are banned in a handful of states, but those laws have proved largely ineffectual, and enforcement at the federal level has also been a disappointment to the concert business.

Three years ago, four men connected with a company called Wiseguy Tickets were indicted on conspiracy, wire fraud and other charges, for apparently using bots to get tickets to Bruce Springsteen, Hannah Montana and other concerts.

The case hinged on whether the men had committed actual crimes or had merely violated the terms of service on Ticketmaster’s site; in the end three of the men were sentenced only to probation and community service (one remained at large).

“They got a slap on the wrist,” Mr. Rapino said. “It wasn’t much of an actual deterrent.”

Not everyone is convinced that bots are the primary villain of the everyday concertgoer. The Fan Freedom Project, a nonprofit group financed by StubHub, has pushed for anti-bot laws around the country, and Jon Potter, its president, praised Ticketmaster for filing its lawsuit last month.

But he also criticized the industry practice of “holds,” in which sometimes large blocks of tickets are reserved for sponsors, fan club members and industry contacts, and never go on sale to the general public.

When it comes to the secondary ticket market, Live Nation has a complicated position. As much as it is trying to block bots, it also profits from the ticket resale market through TicketsNow — its own version of StubHub — as well as through deals with major sports groups, like the National Basketball Association. Mr. Rapino sees no contradiction in Live Nation’s stance.

“I have no problem if you bought a Justin Timberlake ticket and you decide to go sell that ticket to somebody,” he said. “We would first and foremost want to make sure that the first ticket sold, that the fan has a shot to buy that ticket.”

Chris Brown and Rihanna DATE NIGHT at Jay-Z Concert

Rihanna and Chris Brown aren’t even trying to hide it anymore — ’cause it looks like they were getting cozy at the Jay-Z concert tonight … and, based on Twitter, everyone in Brooklyn saw it.

A pic taken from behind RiRi and Chris at Barclays Center is burning up the Internet — they’re seated in VIP … he’s on the left, she’s on the right.

No physical contact — in the photo, anyway — but Chris’ right arm is stretched around the back of Rihanna’s chair.

This reunion comes the night after Chris and Rihanna were spotted at the same table in an NYC nightclub.

They were also seen leaving the same hotel on Wednesday — and, for what it’s worth, Chris’ blind-as-a-bat GF Karrueche tweeted “Bye baby” … just a couple hours before tonight’s concert. Karrueche Tran@karrueche Bye baby

Rihanna and Chris Brown aren’t even trying to hide it anymore — ’cause it looks like they were getting cozy at the Jay-Z concert tonight … and, based on Twitter, everyone in Brooklyn saw it.

A pic taken from behind RiRi and Chris at Barclays Center is burning up the Internet — they’re seated in VIP … he’s on the left, she’s on the right.

No physical contact — in the photo, anyway — but Chris’ right arm is stretched around the back of Rihanna’s chair. 

This reunion comes the night after Chris and Rihanna were spotted at the same table in an NYC nightclub. 

They were also seen leaving the same hotel on Wednesday — and, for what it’s worth, Chris’ blind-as-a-bat GF Karrueche tweeted “Bye baby” … just a couple hours before tonight’s concert.

Justin Bieber sick on stage at first concert of ‘Believe’ tour

“Bieber Fever” hit the Valley in more than one way on Saturday night.

Justin Bieber’s first concert of his new “Believe” tour left many fans in a state of disbelief after the pop star twice vomited on stage during the show.

News of Bieber’s sickness spread quickly as fans attending the sold-out concert at the Jobing.com Arena in Glendale, Ariz. took to Twitter and other social media platforms on the Internet.

Well-known radio personalitiesJohnjay Van Es and Rich Berra were with Bieber before the concert. Van Es confirmed to 3TV that Bieber did have to leave the stage twice during the concert after Bieber vomited on stage.

Van Es said that fans did some of the singing while Bieber was backstage. Bieber did manage to finish the concert, and he even performed an encore. Van Es said that when Bieber returned to the stage he thanked the fans for their support.

Van Es said that when he was with Bieber before the concert Bieber was complaining about feeling weak, but Bieber was eating nachos and drinking Gatorade.

Biber later tweeted “Great show. Getting better for tomorrow’s show !!!! Love u” 

“And …. Milk was a bad choice!” he added.

The “Believe” tour is scheduled for more than 45 cities before wrapping up in Miami, Florida on January 26, 2013 at the American Airlines Arena.

Bieber’s next show is Sunday night in Las Vegas at the MGM Grand Garden Arena.

–

Tool Kit: A Sound System as Resonant a Concert Hall - Tool Kit

You see, music travels to the ear as a smooth wave of sound. But digital music — CDs or MP3s on a music player — stores only bits of information taken at intervals along those sound waves.

Later, your sound system will play a sophisticated game of connect-the-dots to turn that choppy data back into a wave. That takes math. How authentic the playback sounds depends largely on how well the system turns digital dots back into the original wave.

That de-digitizing is done by a computer chip and software combination called a digital-to-analog converter (or DAC) — and here is a little secret of the audio industry — to keep prices down, manufacturers often scrimp on that part. That means mediocre math.

But you can upgrade your processor to make your music sound much more as if it were live, and it doesn’t take any soldering. Just plug an undistinguished box called an outboard DAC between your digital music player (like an iPod, CD player or computer) and an amplifier. (The devices use a USB, optical, 30-pin or coaxial cable or RCA connector cable.) It does better math to make better sound.

They can cost more than $15,000, though some are only $100.

But spending a lot of money won’t necessarily guarantee better sound. Any sound system is only as good as its weakest link, so a $500 DAC isn’t likely to improve a really rudimentary receiver. And because of variances when you mix audio components, a specific DAC may sound very different in your system than in your buddy’s.

Despite all those caveats, it’s not hopeless. After hours of testing several DACs on my 30-year-old home hi-fi and many more hours in a modern high-end system at Soundscape, an audio store in Baltimore, a rotating listening panel of employees and customers came to as close as a consensus as you’ll find among audio buffs. We listened to a stereo wired so we could switch between an $1,800 CD player and a computer playing the same song using a DAC. We also listened to the song on the computer without the DAC. The listeners didn’t know which they were hearing.

Though we mostly listened to a variety of music converted to the Apple lossless format, which makes files smaller but preserves fidelity, we also tried out some MP3 files, which are lower fidelity but take up less space in a player.

We had previously tested low-priced DACs and were disappointed. We found that several costing around $350 provided the best value.

MUSIC HALL DAC15.2 $300

Audiophiles like a big “soundstage” — their term for the impression that the instruments in the recording are spread apart, like a large orchestra on a wide, deep stage of a concert hall. The Music Hall seemed to increase the feeling of width, though not depth.

The most marked characteristic was the brightness it added to instruments in the higher ranges, which is what the company was going for. “If you can separate the instruments, especially in the higher register, you are doing something right,” said Roy Hall, Music Hall’s founder.

SCHIIT BIFROST $350 without USB, $450 with USB

The crowd favorite, it has something rarely found in a $350 DAC: a 32-bit analog processing chip. That helps the converter reconstruct those sound waves better. The Bifrost can also be upgraded, so if USB or processor technology changes, Schiit can install an update.

The outstanding difference was that the Bifrost reliably made the soundstage larger in each dimension. Ed Dorsey, co-owner of Soundscape, said that switching from the DAC while listening to a CD of “All Right Now,” a classic rock song by Free, “was like going from stereo to mono.”

“Wow,” he added.

HRT MUSIC STREAMER II+ $350

The HRT, the smallest DAC tested and the one with the sleekest case, is the only one powered by a USB cable, not an outside power supply. The company said that this helped eliminate noise from a power supply, but I suspect you’d have to have a sensitive sound system (and sensitive ears) to hear it.

Of the DACs, it sounded closest to the original CD versions. “My approach is to create a product that doesn’t editorialize the sound,” said Kevin Halverson, the company’s chief technical officer. Over all, listeners preferred the bigger sound from the HRT DAC over the CD.

CAMBRIDGE AUDIO DACMAGIC 100 $370

This was an odd case. It did better on orchestral music than rock songs, more so than the other DACs. But that is in line with the company’s goals. “We have, at Cambridge, always used live unamplified acoustic music as what we design for,” said John Bevier, national sales and product manager at Cambridge Audio. Those tend to be the recordings that audiophiles are most interested in, he said. Rock doesn’t do as well, he said, because its sound is engineered for the lower fidelity systems it is most likely to be played on.

NUFORCE ICON HDP $450

This demonstrates why audio is so subjective. No single aspect of the NuForce stood out as the best, yet the listeners gave it high marks.

Audiophiles use an exasperatingly ambiguous word, “involving.” It basically denotes how much the sound draws you in. After hearing “All Right Now” countless times over five hours, I found myself unconsciously tapping my foot. That would qualify as involving.

One customer, James Rosenthal, said the soundstage was wider, but less deep than that of the CD player, but he also thought the instruments sounded livelier. A worthwhile trade-off, he said. We agreed that it added some of the smooth richness of tube equipment.

At any listening party with audiophiles, be prepared for an argument. These guys nearly come to fisticuffs arguing over the best method of wiring a DAC. Certainly tweaks can optimize performance, like setting the computer to play at the appropriate bit rate to your DAC ($10 software called BitPerfect automates the process for Macs; it can be set manually on some PCs).

While deliberating details, Mr. Dorsey reminded everyone of a crucial fact. “The bigger point here,” he said, “is these things made your computer sound as good as an $1,800 CD player.”

Tool Kit: A Sound System as Resonant a Concert Hall - Tool Kit

You see, music travels to the ear as a smooth wave of sound. But digital music — CDs or MP3s on a music player — stores only bits of information taken at intervals along those sound waves.

Later, your sound system will play a sophisticated game of connect-the-dots to turn that choppy data back into a wave. That takes math. How authentic the playback sounds depends largely on how well the system turns digital dots back into the original wave.

That de-digitizing is done by a computer chip and software combination called a digital-to-analog converter (or DAC) — and here is a little secret of the audio industry — to keep prices down, manufacturers often scrimp on that part. That means mediocre math.

But you can upgrade your processor to make your music sound much more as if it were live, and it doesn’t take any soldering. Just plug an undistinguished box called an outboard DAC between your digital music player (like an iPod, CD player or computer) and an amplifier. (The devices use a USB, optical, 30-pin or coaxial cable or RCA connector cable.) It does better math to make better sound.

They can cost more than $15,000, though some are only $100.

But spending a lot of money won’t necessarily guarantee better sound. Any sound system is only as good as its weakest link, so a $500 DAC isn’t likely to improve a really rudimentary receiver. And because of variances when you mix audio components, a specific DAC may sound very different in your system than in your buddy’s.

Despite all those caveats, it’s not hopeless. After hours of testing several DACs on my 30-year-old home hi-fi and many more hours in a modern high-end system at Soundscape, an audio store in Baltimore, a rotating listening panel of employees and customers came to as close as a consensus as you’ll find among audio buffs. We listened to a stereo wired so we could switch between an $1,800 CD player and a computer playing the same song using a DAC. We also listened to the song on the computer without the DAC. The listeners didn’t know which they were hearing.

Though we mostly listened to a variety of music converted to the Apple lossless format, which makes files smaller but preserves fidelity, we also tried out some MP3 files, which are lower fidelity but take up less space in a player.

We had previously tested low-priced DACs and were disappointed. We found that several costing around $350 provided the best value.

MUSIC HALL DAC15.2 $300

Audiophiles like a big “soundstage” — their term for the impression that the instruments in the recording are spread apart, like a large orchestra on a wide, deep stage of a concert hall. The Music Hall seemed to increase the feeling of width, though not depth.

The most marked characteristic was the brightness it added to instruments in the higher ranges, which is what the company was going for. “If you can separate the instruments, especially in the higher register, you are doing something right,” said Roy Hall, Music Hall’s founder.

SCHIIT BIFROST $350 without USB, $450 with USB

The crowd favorite, it has something rarely found in a $350 DAC: a 32-bit analog processing chip. That helps the converter reconstruct those sound waves better. The Bifrost can also be upgraded, so if USB or processor technology changes, Schiit can install an update.

The outstanding difference was that the Bifrost reliably made the soundstage larger in each dimension. Ed Dorsey, co-owner of Soundscape, said that switching from the DAC while listening to a CD of “All Right Now,” a classic rock song by Free, “was like going from stereo to mono.”

“Wow,” he added.

HRT MUSIC STREAMER II+ $350

The HRT, the smallest DAC tested and the one with the sleekest case, is the only one powered by a USB cable, not an outside power supply. The company said that this helped eliminate noise from a power supply, but I suspect you’d have to have a sensitive sound system (and sensitive ears) to hear it.

Of the DACs, it sounded closest to the original CD versions. “My approach is to create a product that doesn’t editorialize the sound,” said Kevin Halverson, the company’s chief technical officer. Over all, listeners preferred the bigger sound from the HRT DAC over the CD.

CAMBRIDGE AUDIO DACMAGIC 100 $370

This was an odd case. It did better on orchestral music than rock songs, more so than the other DACs. But that is in line with the company’s goals. “We have, at Cambridge, always used live unamplified acoustic music as what we design for,” said John Bevier, national sales and product manager at Cambridge Audio. Those tend to be the recordings that audiophiles are most interested in, he said. Rock doesn’t do as well, he said, because its sound is engineered for the lower fidelity systems it is most likely to be played on.

NUFORCE ICON HDP $450

This demonstrates why audio is so subjective. No single aspect of the NuForce stood out as the best, yet the listeners gave it high marks.

Audiophiles use an exasperatingly ambiguous word, “involving.” It basically denotes how much the sound draws you in. After hearing “All Right Now” countless times over five hours, I found myself unconsciously tapping my foot. That would qualify as involving.

One customer, James Rosenthal, said the soundstage was wider, but less deep than that of the CD player, but he also thought the instruments sounded livelier. A worthwhile trade-off, he said. We agreed that it added some of the smooth richness of tube equipment.

At any listening party with audiophiles, be prepared for an argument. These guys nearly come to fisticuffs arguing over the best method of wiring a DAC. Certainly tweaks can optimize performance, like setting the computer to play at the appropriate bit rate to your DAC ($10 software called BitPerfect automates the process for Macs; it can be set manually on some PCs).

While deliberating details, Mr. Dorsey reminded everyone of a crucial fact. “The bigger point here,” he said, “is these things made your computer sound as good as an $1,800 CD player.”