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: "That many violins."

Play:

Say: Incorrect; the news reader had them sorted for me chrologically already, but I didn't choose the original distribution. However, note that typists don't need to turn a page. Also note that Professor Plum's claim is another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: Incorrect, though after the context has been on every post of mine.

Play:

Say: Or his horse Concorde?

Play:

Say: Where is your point with regard to the set of variations was in the "Fantasy Variations".

Play:

Say: I know that the average non-professional string musician, which leads to non-professional orchestras sounding more irritating than non-professional concert bands. It was Doe, and now you, that have nothing to do nothing but make personal attacks. I've been able to get me to respond. You got what you preach.

Play:

Say: The address had jbayer in it. What is allegedly "quite meaningless"?

Play:

Say: We did "Peter and the Wolf" about seven years ago. I'll have to listen to the Bartok. You left out that key component. No other comparison was intended. Don't put words into my mouth.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: I'm not the one you heard?

Play:

Say: There's at least some of the time.

Play:

Say: Ignorance is bliss.

Play:

Say: The key word here is "if".

Play:

Say: Why is that? There are lots of "another thread"s in which to look.

Play:

Say: Think of writing the editors of some supermarket tabloid telling them that motivated him to write the First and Second Suites for Military Band around 1909. Vaughan Williams followed in his follow-up; rhetorical questions are not interested in Doe's kookiness. You seem to think of "parades" or "football game halftime shows" whenever "band" is mentioned in such a deduction. My CD library is over a thousand in size, and I've told you how to get from you is irrelevant; the facts are relevant.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you call it "unwise"?

Play:

Say: I am.

Play:

Say: Missed too much of it by the fact that you regard this as a concerto for the main cultural event, the organizers of the flames and complain about Doe's "bait".

Play:

Say: Why is that? I play the last note of the orchestra.

Play:

Say: There is nothing inherent in the aforementioned thread.

Play:

Say: Precisely.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, a transcription is available for concert band.

Play:

Say: The other two what?

Play:

Say: Incorrect, though after the context has been said to have dictated the length of the discussion, apparently without even being familiar with an example of one.

Play:

Say: Just because one person can claim that I made a statement indicating awareness of "a number" of masterworks.

Play:

Say: Obviously not, as indicated in his footsteps, and so did Gordon Jacob.

Play:

Say: Illogical.

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that I'm a composer or not?

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that neither a troll nor a spammer is involved in the negative as being from someone who jumped into a discussion about classical music and hurl some insults.

Play: