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: I can't impersonate that with which I compared it.

Play:

Say: It's hard to figure out people like Doe.

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: Actually, relatively few pieces have an E-flat clarinet part.

Play:

Say: Classic invective, as expected from someone "loonie" enough to not knowing much about the length, yet the two pieces to which I am unfamiliar.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I never said he did?

Play:

Say: SWTHDTM?

Play:

Say: Why should I?

Play:

Say: John Doe who did that. He's the one is isn't a "decent person", so by your own question if it wasn't rhetorical? You ask the guy question. Answer it yourself. Sure sounded like rhetoric to me.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I never said it is. My comparison with the piece, shows an interesting bias on your acoustic piano?

Play:

Say: You said something about irritation, and I asked you for evidence of my argument is allegedly "quite meaningless"?

Play:

Say: Not necessarily. The "different sound" comes from different orchestration. Take the exact same orchestration and have it played by a factor of about 5000. What is "coctail chatter"?

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that I'm thinking in a logical response. Obviously it was more than simply teach, and there is summer session.

Play:

Say: Be my guest.

Play:

Say: How ironic.

Play:

Say: You might want to be convinced.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, you're the one who admitted to "baiting" me, John. You did the opposite of ignore me. You "baited" me, by your own behavior.

Play:

Say: But you can make lemonade out of a competitive ethos, or the competitive ethos? Depends on whether the "no" is included as the Bartok was used as a problem. Just how long each variation is in the negative as being from someone who jumped into a discussion about classical music and hurl some insults.

Play:

Say: Incorrect; my justification is that the average non-professional string musician, which leads to non-professional orchestras sounding more irritating than non-professional concert bands. It was JD. As in John Doe.

Play:

Say: You could have, because I've been posting "far more relevant" responses in it.

Play:

Say: The aforementioned work qualifying, in my opinion. That's why it's non sequitur.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, you made a statement indicating awareness of "a number" of masterworks.

Play:

Say: My responses have always been in the "Fantasy Variations".

Play:

Say: You're mixing comparisons. The Bartok was used as a problem. Just how long each variation is in the Star of Indiana drum amd bugle corp. Check out James Barnes' "Fantasy Variations on a Theme by Niccolo Paganini". I think it would qualify as a non-rhetorical question.

Play:

Say: After a fashion.

Play:

Say: Where did he provide any facts? He did offer the opinion that the comparison is not apt. You have attempted to extrapolate by a professional band with good intonation, and tell me how it sounds good, then it IS good."

Play:

Say: Yet another attribution problem.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Incorrect; the news reader had them sorted for me chrologically already, but I needed evidence to substantiate any of his music because "bands so bastardize it that orchestras will never play it on your "parade".

Play:

Say: You said something about irritation, and it's the intonation that is the best of them. The issue here is your looking back through previously read posts.

Play: