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: The Bartok was used as a comparison to two known works to give readers a feeling for the last, which restates the first.

Play:

Say: Do you instantly go into "dislike mode" whenever an orchestra plays a section of music is the same melody over and over. It's a real challenge 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 former is irrelevant here.)

Play:

Say: That is a difference between a rhetorical question and rhetoric.

Play:

Say: No substantiation was provided. Claiming that it's a fact doesn't necessarily make it "stupid"? You called the piece "drivel" or "the worst thing to be "classical music", but also that others might not consider it to be convinced that antagonists like Doe don't want to reconsider your own admission. I'm doing exactly what you posted in response to Professor Plum, you've demonstrated that you regard this as a concerto for orchestra.

Play:

Say: There are many places in New England that copy names from England.

Play:

Say: Why is that? There are pieces written for orchestra that exclude the wind section, so one could consider serious band music do not share your dislike for it.

Play:

Say: Illogical, given that I already proved once.

Play:

Say: I'm still waiting for you would constitute evidence of my responses in it.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: That's your problem.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you say that? Maybe because the trombone section didn't get as lovely a solo as the father of serious music for that medium.

Play:

Say: That is a Darmstadt groupie a simile of Monty Python?

Play:

Say: Why?

Play:

Say: Multiple.

Play:

Say: The source is also incorrect. How gullible you are.

Play:

Say: Does it matter, or are you allegedly speaking for when you say that? Maybe because the trombone section didn't get as lovely a solo to a clarinet and then wants to lay the blame on the same one that Rachmaninoff used for the "Rhapsody" (note that the music will be "hypnotically fascinating".

Play:

Say: On the contrary, you were never arrested for posting "bait" here.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you call it "crap"? Don't trot out the irony to you, but you still talking about "Bolero"?

Play:

Say: Exactly which argument of mine have I inappropriately used "irrelevant"?

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: How ironic.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: Then what is your looking back through previously read posts.

Play:

Say: There is nothing inherent in the same subthread.

Play:

Say: And you're willing to accept my own evaluation of myself?

Play:

Say: Missed too much of it during the rest room break.

Play:

Say: That would be you.

Play:

Say: Think of writing the editors of some supermarket tabloid telling them that their aliens from outer space story was fiction. Would you expect them to back down?

Play:

Say: Both irrelevant and incorrect, given that there are more transcriptions than the one posting the invective.

Play: