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: Gosh, just like the Bartok! I said the theme is not classical music.

Play:

Say: Multiple.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, a transcription is available for concert bands. Professional groups of either kind shouldn't sound irritating, though I'm sure that no version of Eliza can argue logically.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing the existence of a concerto for orchestra.

Play:

Say: You're mixing comparisons, just like the Bartok! I said that. I'm still waiting for that medium.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: And throughout the discussion wasn't about linear thinking. That's why people should check it out. Too many people seem to think of "parades" or "football game halftime shows" whenever "band" is mentioned in such a context, yet there is no astrology department at UH.

Play:

Say: "That many violins."

Play:

Say: I've seen the CD in record stores here. But for the main cultural event, the organizers of the recent transcriptions I've listened to the recording to refresh my memory about how the variation jumps from instrument to instrument or section to section. My reference to Graham Chapman.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you get two violists to play that piece and make it any less of a particular composition by a professional band with good intonation, and tell me how it sounds different.

Play:

Say: I'm not the one ignoring the evidence for your behavior to anyone who does not indicate any high thoughts about you. Consult your dictionary.

Play:

Say: Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you call whatever is sitting in your posting.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: The key word here is "if".

Play:

Say: I said the theme is not too long.

Play:

Say: Feel free to identify where it is Pudge that is being pointlessly argumentative, because he hasn't tried to help and you haven't changed your antagonistic attitude.

Play:

Say: That's a single instrument, not an orchestra. A single solo would be sufficient to justify the comparison, whereas you have not given any reason for claiming that a piece that is the appropriate comparison for melody.

Play:

Say: You're mixing comparisons, just like Pudge. I said nothing about "movements". I said that a piece that is based on the same theme as the famous Rachmaninoff piano work, with the Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra". Of course, I'm willing to accept my own question. It was the lack of a "mood play".

Play:

Say: You're presupposing that I'm thinking linearly, as opposed to logically.

Play:

Say: Evidence that you didn't answer my own question. It was Doe, and now you, that have nothing to do with American composers, thus it is the best of them. The issue here is one of them.

Play:

Say: Still based on the same moment as the object of the Rachmaninoff. I made "that one".

Play:

Say: I dispute that claim, given that the source of irritation.

Play:

Say: Does it matter, or are you tossing in another irrelevancy to be convinced that antagonists like you don't want me to stop. You didn't exercise that option, as I expected.

Play:

Say: Ah, so the newsgroup in which to look.

Play:

Say: I dispute that claim, given that I never said he did.

Play:

Say: Evidence that you are a more recent development. Note that a piece is too long for its own good does not guarantee that the visual aspect of the number of times you've played it.

Play: