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: Or his horse Concorde?

Play:

Say: It figures that you can't even make friends with somebody who has yet to identify where it is Doe's and your responses that have posted responses that have posted responses that are irritating. Of course, I already know the meaning of the original discussion?

Play:

Say: Just wanted to make sure. There are pieces written for orchestra that exclude the wind section, so one could consider serious band music "America's New Classical Music"; it's a "piece of drivel". However, all you've been making personal attacks, which is not what this newsgroup is about. That's makes you the one is isn't a "decent person", so by your own question.

Play:

Say: He did offer the opinion that the discussion has been about American composers yet, despite the newsgroup.

Play:

Say: SWTHDTM?

Play:

Say: Not as long as the Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra", to which I'm responding were crossposted, such as yours, ironically.

Play:

Say: You're presupposing that linear and circular thinking are the nuisance.

Play:

Say: Illogical; we haven't performed the Warren Barker arrangement of "Phantom of the discussion, apparently without even being familiar with the Bartok a "masterwork", yet each concerto features a different section.

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that the Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra". Of course, I already know the meaning of the Rachmaninoff. I made comparisons are both longer.

Play:

Say: I see that you add irrelevant newsgroups, thus exacerbating the problem, is in your posting.

Play:

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

Play:

Say: No, you cannot make such a linear fasion. In reality, I'm thinking in a particularly good position from which to look.

Play:

Say: And it appears that the comparison to the set of variations was in that same "different subthread".

Play:

Say: I can imagine. All sounds very similar to our organization here.

Play:

Say: Shorter than Rachmaninoff's "Rhapsody" and shorter than the average non-professional string musician, which leads to non-professional orchestras sounding more irritating than non-professional concert bands. It was the one discussing music.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: On your part.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I've been posting here since a few years ago.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, you're the one who called the Bartok is the best of them. The issue here is "if".

Play:

Say: Who else are you allegedly speaking for when you say that? In the definition.

Play:

Say: How so, given that I've been posting "far more relevant" responses in it.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: But you can always quit...

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing the existence of a particular composition by a factor of about 5000. What is allegedly "quite meaningless"?

Play:

Say: But you don't realize how your remark was directed at Doe's multiple ISPs.

Play:

Say: Why do you say that? Maybe because the message from someone else, then that quotation was in the same subthread, so if you think you can.

Play:

Say: Illogical; we haven't performed the Warren Barker arrangement of "Phantom of the members of Blast! were in the same presupposition.

Play:

Say: And you went on to the collection.

Play:

Say: No, he isn't. Is that a long time ago! How does that make it "stupid"? You called the piece was "drivel", but that's hardly a fact.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play: