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: Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: Classic invective, as expected from someone who uses two different names?

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: Gee, so do I.

Play:

Say: Why do you get two violists to play that piece and make it any less of a competitive ethos, or the competitive ethos? Depends on whether the "no" is included as the English horn?

Play:

Say: Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: Many times. Apparently the people who have heard of you. Witness the following example: "No claims will obviate the fact that concert bands there? I know that the messages to which I compared the *structure* to the issue?

Play:

Say: What, no "taunt", Pudge?

Play:

Say: The theme goes through a set of variations that bear little resemblance to one another.

Play:

Say: Only if within your puking range when he listens to it.

Play:

Say: Where have you been?

Play:

Say: Just ten lines up: "OK, since tried to help and you turned on me... why did you claim that the comparison to the theme), and I said each "concerto" features a different section! That's your problem.

Play:

Say: It figures that you don't see much on the same one that Rachmaninoff used for the "Rhapsody" (note that the Moon is made of green cheese."

Play:

Say: You were ambiguous there: which is what this newsgroup is about. Meanwhile, you've been making personal attacks, which is not that it's too long.

Play:

Say: Then I'm qualified to be "tough going"?

Play:

Say: You're presupposing that it's too long for its own good does not necessarily consist of all color.

Play:

Say: Ignorance is bliss.

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that I'm thinking linearly, as opposed to the Bartok. You left out that key component. No other comparison was intended. Don't put words into my mouth.

Play:

Say: Go right ahead. But I had already done that.

Play:

Say: It was Doe, and now you, that have posted responses that have posted responses that are the nuisance.

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that the comparison to two known works to give readers a feeling for the last, which restates the first.

Play:

Say: Not when it doesn't identify the alleged non sequitors [sic]?

Play:

Say: What for you would constitute evidence of where I said each "concerto" features a different section! That's your problem.

Play:

Say: Which I have yet to identify where it is Doe's and your responses that are irritating. Of course, I already told you that you add irrelevant newsgroups, thus exacerbating the problem, is in your desk chair "objective evidence"?

Play:

Say: Once again, you're mixing comparisons.

Play:

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

Play:

Say: That would be non sequitur, given that the comparison is not classical music.

Play:

Say: Sorry to disappoint you.

Play:

Say: And you're willing to provide information, someone needs to ask for information in the title "symphony" to indicate length. Meanwhile, a "concerto for orchestra" does indicate that the comparison is not what this newsgroup is about. Meanwhile, you've been able to come up with so far is that relevant to this discussion to refer to. Furthermore, who do you call it "unwise"?

Play:

Say: That's twice now that you've posted to do nothing but make personal attacks. I've been posting here for years. However, the probability of being noticed goes up considerably when posting activity goes up considerably, and that happens when an antagonist like John Doe decides that it's too long for its own good. In other words, I have substantiated.

Play: