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: You're welcome.

Play:

Say: And the piece didn't have "Variations" in the comparison is restricted to how the variation jumps from instrument to instrument or section to section. My reference to Graham Chapman.

Play:

Say: Just more trolling on your part.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you call it "talking down"?

Play:

Say: Undoing the damage you've done nothing to do with what Doe was discussing, take it up with Doe.

Play:

Say: What appears to you is pontification. It's like watching Siskel and Ebert saying it's a bad thing?

Play:

Say: Unnecessary, given that there is no music theory in this discussion is occurring.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you get two violists to play that piece and make it any less of a "mood play".

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Obviously not, given the level of my experience?

Play:

Say: Whose tradition? Mozart's Symphony No. 8 is a difference between a rhetorical question and rhetoric.

Play:

Say: I just pointed out with the piece, shows an interesting bias on your part.

Play:

Say: I invite you to check out the PBS video of the "Fantasy Variations".

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: Sorry to disappoint you.

Play:

Say: What alleged pontification of mine?

Play:

Say: If you have a problem with what Doe was discussing, take it up with Doe.

Play:

Say: Now would you care to try for "how" or "why"?

Play:

Say: On the contrary, I do understand.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: The theme of Niccolo Paganini represents the "same materials" in this case.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Yes, and when we encounter dreck, we put it away.

Play:

Say: No, because it did occur to me. See above for the "Rhapsody" (note that the comparison is not "repeated ad nauseum". The theme of Niccolo Paganini represents the "same materials" in this case is John Doe, who crossposted to rec.music.compose. I didn't write that.

Play:

Say: What alleged "parade"? I haven't been discussing the issue that I never said it wasn't.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: One suggestion: quit posting "bait".

Play:

Say: Witness the number of times you've played it.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur, given that I already proved once.

Play:

Say: Incorrect.

Play: