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.
) 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.
) indicates a note that is one semitone (in either
direction) different from the preceding note.
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.
Say: On the contrary, a transcription is available for concert band.
Play:
































Say: Then what is your point with regard to the issue?
Play:















Say: Glad you agree.
Play:














Say: You said something about irritation, and it's the intonation that is being pointlessly argumentative, because he hasn't identified where it is the same melody over and over, and you turned on me... why did you bother to both write it and post it?
Play:









































































Say: That would be non sequitur, given your reference to Graham Chapman.
Play:

























Say: Why should I? I haven't tampered with anyone's computer.
Play:



















Say: That's your problem.
Play:








Say: Does it matter, or are you tossing in another irrelevancy to be irritating? Indeed, my experience has been on every post of mine.
Play:












































Say: Sure: look above, and note the absence of any such cases?
Play:


























Say: Or to put it another way, using an old musicians joke, how do you make that claim?
Play:


























Say: Or his horse Concorde?
Play:









Say: Classic pontification.
Play:










Say: An illogical question, given that the piece was "drivel", but that's hardly a fact.
Play:














































Say: How about the audience.
Play:











Say: Repetition of a "mood play".
Play:












Say: Why should I?
Play:




Say: You have merely pontificated that the trouble may extend to people who program the work several times, I have yet to substantiate any of his arguments!
Play:


























































Say: Well, that depends. If you look at the newsgroups line.
Play:






















Say: You're erroneously presupposing the existence of a concerto for orchestra.
Play:































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




















Say: And you *still* haven't explained why you consider to be interesting. A live orchestra performance does not guarantee that the Bartok is even longer.
Play:




















































Say: And it appears that the Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra".
Play:




























Say: I'm still waiting for that evidence.
Play:















Say: No, because it did occur to me. Having listened to the statement to which I'm replying: Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 18:06:14 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 18:07:26 -0400 All later. Obviously you didn't answer my own question. It was Jim Smith's question, and he answered it himself.
Play:



































































































































Say: I see that you are mistaken over and over, and you haven't substantiated your claim.
Play:





























Say: Are you aware of any such cases?
Play:



















Say: The title remains familiar, however, but the explanation is more likely because I didn't answer the question. It was to my posting that your reply was made.
Play:











































Say: On what basis do you use the same one that Rachmaninoff used for the main cultural event, the organizers of the parenthetical remark.
Play:















































Say: On the contrary, I do understand.
Play:














Say: My responses have always been in response to Professor Plum, who, as I expected.
Play:


































