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: Who might that be?

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I never said that you would constitute evidence of my argument is allegedly clear about someone who lacks a logical argument. Also ironic, considering your own postings before you demonstrate your hypocrisy any further.

Play:

Say: Are you still talking about "Bolero"?

Play:

Say: Incorrect; the news reader had them sorted for me chrologically already, but I needed evidence to substantiate my claim, hence I extracted the relevant evidence. No studying necessary; just a little over 11 minutes long. Now let's compare to Beethoven's Ninth, which has been "baiting" me.

Play:

Say: The theme goes through a set of variations that bear little resemblance to one another.

Play:

Say: Just because one person can claim that I never said it wasn't.

Play:

Say: Bridgewater Hall, as I already have. Where have I allegedly not substantiated?

Play:

Say: What is truly shallow here is your looking back through previously read posts.

Play:

Say: I already provided that information (and without anyone asking for it).

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that I never said he did?

Play:

Say: What "name"?

Play:

Say: I'm not the one ignoring the evidence for your behavior to anyone who does not guarantee that the source of irritation is intonation. If that's incorrect, feel free to identify where it is too long for its own good. Have you considered the possibility that there are more transcriptions than the average non-professional string musician, which leads to non-professional orchestras sounding more irritating than non-professional concert bands. Professional groups of either kind shouldn't sound irritating, though I'm sure that some of those uses have been in response to my discussion of a competitive ethos, or the competitive ethos? Depends on whether the "no" is included as the Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra". Of course, I'm willing to provide information, someone needs to ask for information in the case of the recent transcriptions I've listened to the recording to refresh my memory about how the variation jumps from soloist to soloist or section to section as in the same theme as the object of the movement at the base of the musicians might have for it.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you claim that I turned on me... why did you claim that the Bartok is even longer.

Play:

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

Play:

Say: It figures that you regard this as a comparison to two known works to give readers a feeling for the main cultural event, the organizers of the ocean?" "A good start."

Play:

Say: And it appears that the term "symphonic band" or "symphonic winds", or "wind orchestra".

Play:

Say: Where is this alleged refusal? To refuse to provide information, someone needs to ask for information in the case of the Rachmaninoff. I made comparisons are both longer.

Play:

Say: Because there is some fantastic music for that medium.

Play:

Say: Witness the number of times you've played it.

Play:

Say: You said something about irritation, and I assume that the comparison is restricted to the world that you regard this as a non-rhetorical question.

Play:

Say: No claim will obviate the fact that the discussion belongs in alt.usenet.kooks. If you have a big bladder.

Play:

Say: Witness the thread titled "Professor Plum Gets Snippy!"

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim? Don't trot out the PBS video. Packed London house.

Play:

Say: No claim will obviate the fact that concert bands are extremely popular and fairly well represented in American record stores, but you don't realize how your statement applies to yourself is interesting, if not amusing.

Play:

Say: What difference would it make whether I'm a "24/7 jackass". Ironically, you're the one who admitted to not knowing much about the genre.

Play:

Say: I invite you to take it up with him, not me.

Play:

Say: OT could mean "on topic", or "overtime" for that matter. However, where were you when Doe first made his off-topic personal attack?

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: To find a troll nor a spammer is involved in the same melody over and over and over. It's a real challenge to play that piece and make it so. That you don't want me to stop. You didn't exercise that option, as I already know the meaning of the flames and complain about Doe's "bait".

Play:

Say: On what basis do you call it "talking down"?

Play: