Some time between 1996 and 2002 I heard an anecdote of an entirely silent piano concert.

The piano was gimmicked, modified so it didn't make any sound at all as the pianist played on it. This was a solo concert, with just the pianist playing. The pianist played specific real pieces of piano music at the start of the concert (silently), but switched to just hitting the keys at random in the later parts of the concert. The concert was successful with the audience, they requested multiple encores. The concert had been advertised as something like “the mute pianist” playing or some such. I do not know when the concert was, but it may have been decades before I heard the anecdote. I do not know if it was in Hungary or abroad.

Can you point me to any information about the actual concert? When was it, who was playing, where, how large was the aduience, how many times has this happened, anything?

I tried to search on the web, but I only found various other stories. None of the following are what I'm looking for.

• Performances of John Cage's 4′33″.
• A concert on a so called “Silent piano”, electric piano that the audience can hear only through headphones.
• A story about german musician who spent several months in 2005 in a psychiatric hospital in Great Britain, never speaking a word, but playing the piano well.

– b_jonas 15:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of the concert you refer to, but (perhaps inspired by it), some years ago a BBC music-quiz programme on (radio and?) TV regularly included a round of 'Silent piano' where the pianist played pieces on said instrument and contestants had to try to identify them from the mechanical sound of the keys. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.0.128.132 (talk) 00:50, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was Face the Music, and the pianist was Joseph Cooper. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:15, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, and the celebrity contestants would identify it from hand movements, which the radio audience didn't see. That makes much more sense, thanks, AndrewWTaylor. Interesting tangent, but my original question is still up. – b_jonas 12:18, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know it was only ever a TV programme, not radio. For TV viewers, but not the panel or studio audience, the sound was faded in after a while, making identification of the piece somewhat easier. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 18:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for filling my memory deficiency, Andrew. Incidentally, I notice that the FtM article's Reference two has suffered link rot: instead of linking to the relevant Independent 2011 obituary, it now goes to the current front page. Beyond my Wiki-fu – anyone? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.0.128.132 (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find the obituary on archive.org, or anywhere else, and it's flagged as a "permanent dead link" in Cooper's article, so it may be lost for ever, at least online. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 19:00, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't there a name for the proposition that overall, most films/books/etc. have poor quality, and only a few films/books/etc. are great?

Maybe "law of (something)". --Daniel Carrero (talk) 16:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, Sturgeon's law, which states that "ninety percent of everything is crap". --Antiquary (talk) 17:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's it! Thanks. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 17:27, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who was ever forced to read Silas Marner might agree. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:25, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Baseball Bugs:: I didn't read it, so now I'm curious. What exactly do you mean? Are you saying that book is crap? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 21:39, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just 90 percent of it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Baseball Bugs:: LOL, got it! --Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:10, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All novels are Mystery Novels if you don't read the ending. —107.15.152.93 (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For clarification, Sturgeon's Law and similar propositions usually refer to an entire genre of literature or other art, an artist's overall corpus, or a field of study, not to the contents of a single novel or other work of art. (Moved to comment because I was privileged to know Ted Sturgeon towards the end of his life.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.0.128.132 (talk) 00:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Did you also know nine crap writers around that time? Or, more dramatically, first? Not asking for names, just curious. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:54, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I was acquainted with dozens of writers, being a frequent SF/Fantasy Convention attendee in the UK (whose fan-run cons were generally small and intimate compared to US Cons, and which writers often attended as ordinary members, not just as GoHs). It happened that after I met Ted and his partner Jayne at a con, they made an extended visit to the east coast of Scotland where I then lived, and I helped to arrange accommodation for them. As for how many of the writers I knew/know were/are crap, I'm not going to disclose detailed judgements, except to say that one of them was Lionel Fanthorpe, whose own opinion of his fiction output was refreshingly realistic. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.0.128.132 (talk) 05:52, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What kind of refreshingly realistic opinion did Lionel Fanthorpe have about his own fiction output? I don't suppose he called it crap or anything like that, right? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 03:58, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]