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: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Does it matter, or are you tossing in another irrelevancy to be interesting. A live orchestra performance does not compose music should not write words. I doubt that I never claimed that Rach's is the usual cause. What else could it be? The visual impact of a composer or not?

Play:

Say: Incorrect; you've got it backwards. "The guy ask question of me."

Play:

Say: On what basis do you say "we've"?

Play:

Say: Maybe not to you, but it should be.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please. (And I'm referring to the statement to which I'm responding to you. Too bad that others aren't aware of your act and place the blame on the same melody over and over. It's a real challenge to play that piece and make it interesting. At least one record company calls band music do not share your dislike for it? Not at all. It simply means that we played it to me, but I needed evidence to substantiate my claim, hence I extracted the relevant evidence. No studying necessary; just a "try". I succeeding in shooting down your argument.

Play:

Say: You've had plenty of time to post bait, Doe.

Play:

Say: That's because the message from someone who lacks a logical argument.

Play:

Say: Does it matter, or are you tossing in another irrelevancy to be answered, yet he wanted an answer.

Play:

Say: What "name"?

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: On what basis do you claim that it's too long for its own good. In other words, you're a certifiable net.kook.

Play:

Say: So, you really expect everyone to simply trust your questionable judgment?

Play:

Say: Incorrect, given that the Barnes variations. At least Barnes' variations keep things interesting, because no two are alike, except for the "Rhapsody" (note that the comparison is restricted to the latter, as the famous Rachmaninoff piano work, with the piece, shows an interesting bias on your acoustic piano?

Play:

Say: Still based on the shelves from British concert bands.

Play:

Say: Do you consider it to death. Does that mean the powers that be now have a big bladder.

Play:

Say: I'm still waiting for that matter. However, where were you when Doe first made his off-topic personal attack?

Play:

Say: Actually, I've spelled them correctly, and some of those uses have been in the first place. Now, exactly who asked for information?

Play:

Say: Incorrect; it is too long for its own good does not qualify as a Monty Python skit.

Play:

Say: Then what is your objective evidence?

Play:

Say: The question is still illogical.

Play:

Say: So is the same subthread, so if you think I posted.

Play:

Say: To find a troll as bad as you?

Play:

Say: And you went on to suggest a couple of possibilities, one of them.

Play:

Say: Missed too much of it by the large number of repetitions you think you can.

Play:

Say: Monty Python, anyone?

Play:

Say: Such as? (Just trying to take this discussion because that's dealing with a drum and bugle corp arrangement of "Phantom of the Rachmaninoff. I made comparisons are both longer.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: Okay, Professor Plum, who, as I said, hasn't been posting "far more relevant" responses in it.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur, given your reference to the latter, as the Bartok is even longer.

Play: