Instructions

Alternate sections are marked Say and Play. The Say sections are spoken or sung to an improvised tune in a stentorian and condescending manner, as a traffic court judge lecturing a recidivist speeder. Read as though the text makes perfect sense, even though its grammar and meaning may make sudden, unexpected turns.

The Play sections use an ordinary five-line staff with oval note heads () interspersed with diamond () and cross () note heads. Play in a manner that contrasts with the lecturer's attitude. Be mocking or solicitous or calm or resigned or anything else appropriate.

• I've used bar lines set off groups of notes. Groups should be observed by accent, phrasing, pauses or some other way.
• The cross () indicates some non-standard noise, like a multiphonic or a strum behind the bridge or a dropped drumstick or a cheese-grater arpeggio or something else. Use your imagination.
• The diamond () indicates a note that is one semitone (in either direction) different from the preceding note.
• Rhythm, tempo and dynamics are entirely up to the performer. Since no clef is specified, you can pick that as well.

You can play in concert with other performers, who may play other versions of this piece, or other any other materials, composed or improvised. When playing with others, the Say sections should be performed as disruptively as possible, and the Play sections should be played sensitively, with utmost regard to enhancing the performance of the other players.

Score

Say: On the contrary, you asked to be here.

Play:

Say: One suggestion: quit posting "bait".

Play:

Say: Many times. Apparently the people who program the work several times, I have yet to substantiate my claim, hence I extracted the relevant evidence. No studying necessary; just a little over 11 minutes long. Mozart's Symphony No. 11 is less then 10 minutes long. Now let's compare to Beethoven's Ninth, which has been that the brass bands are a troll? Amazing! Yes, let's show them all what you mean. Some of the time.

Play:

Say: I'm not the one who brought up irritation.

Play:

Say: And it appears that the discussion has been said to have dictated the length of the discussion, apparently without even being familiar with an example of one.

Play:

Say: Composers of band music "America's New Classical Music"; it's a fact doesn't necessarily make it so. That you have your attributions confused.

Play:

Say: Because there is some fantastic music for that medium.

Play:

Say: Orbital eccentricity. I've also observed a lot of human eccentricity.

Play:

Say: Is that how you intend to explain how your statement applies to yourself is interesting, if not amusing.

Play:

Say: What you think you can.

Play:

Say: Then what needs work is your objective evidence?

Play:

Say: Witness the following example: "No claims will obviate the fact that you haven't changed your antagonistic attitude.

Play:

Say: Actually, I've spelled them correctly, and some of Alfred Reed's works, such as the father of serious music for that matter. However, where were you when Doe first made his off-topic personal attack?

Play:

Say: And throughout the discussion is occurring.

Play:

Say: I didn't know Holst wasn't born there. Where was he born?

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: Shorter than Rachmaninoff's "Rhapsody" and shorter than the so-called "masterwork". Obviously length isn't the criterion.

Play:

Say: Maybe I do understand.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur; I'm talking about "Bolero"?

Play:

Say: What for you to check out the "too long" excuse, given that neither a troll nor a spammer is involved in the Barnes variations. At least Barnes' variations keep things interesting, because no two are alike, except for the "Rhapsody" (note that the piece didn't have any trouble hearing the minor mistake by the large number of musicians on the stage isn't what you preach.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I rode in on the posting to which I compared the *structure* to the Rachmaninoff is the "Fantasy Variations".

Play:

Say: Yes.

Play:

Say: Who else are you allegedly speaking for when you say "we" don't mention a name?

Play:

Say: "What do you call it "talking down"?

Play:

Say: No, he isn't. Is that how you ignored the evidence so that an argument can be perpetuated.

Play:

Say: Why should it be the other way around? The music itself is inanimate; it won't have any reaction to how the variation jumps from soloist to soloist or section to section as in Bartok (note that the Barnes variations are too long.

Play:

Say: What for you to take this discussion because that's dealing with something that has "little inherent sophistication".

Play:

Say: So why did you answer your own standards, you shouldn't be here. How ironic. You're the champ of net hypocrites.

Play:

Say: Again, I dispute that claim, given that the comparison is restricted to how the string parts were transcribed. Our arrangement was done by Jim Curnow.

Play:

Say: What alleged pontification of mine?

Play: