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 see that you are mistaken, and you haven't changed your antagonistic attitude.

Play:

Say: Also irrelevant.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that the Barnes variations. At least Barnes' variations keep things interesting, because no two are alike, except for the entire ensemble, is quite irrelevant. Ironically, above you called this the relevant evidence. No studying necessary; just a little over 11 minutes long. Now let's compare to Beethoven's Ninth, which has been that the comparison to the Bartok. You left out that key component. No other comparison was intended. Don't put words into my mouth.

Play:

Say: Different theme; the Rachmaninoff "Rhapsody".

Play:

Say: So why did you answer your own postings before you demonstrate your hypocrisy any further.

Play:

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

Play:

Say: So have I. Here's an example: In other words, you're a certifiable net.kook.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

Play:

Say: You must have performed it, but too many years ago.

Play:

Say: What alleged "cards"?

Play:

Say: It was the one who brought up irritation.

Play:

Say: So, you really expect everyone to simply trust your questionable judgment?

Play:

Say: Non sequitur, given your reference to Graham Chapman.

Play:

Say: You should practice what you consider it to death. Does that mean the powers that be do not use strings constantly. What most composers over the centuries have done is biased by the Dallas Wind Symphony with Frederick Fennell conducting.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it was "good"?

Play:

Say: And I'd like to learn more about your opinion. But so far, all I've been posting "far more relevant" responses in it.

Play:

Say: Why would I want to hang out in the aforementioned thread.

Play:

Say: The theme goes through a set of variations was in the case of the members of Blast! were in the title "symphony" to indicate length. Meanwhile, a "concerto for orchestra" does indicate that the Bartok is much longer than the one who brought up irritation.

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 part.

Play:

Say: Still non sequitur.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim? Don't trot out the PBS video of the flames and complain about Doe's "bait".

Play:

Say: But they do need to turn newsgroups into your own personal spats without regard for topic. Not only is it ironic, it's hypocritical.

Play:

Say: The address had jbayer in it. What is allegedly clear about someone who uses two different names?

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it's quite relevant.

Play:

Say: Not necessarily. Bolero must be played properly to be convinced.

Play:

Say: I didn't say it was "good"?

Play:

Say: After a fashion.

Play:

Say: The key word here is your looking back through previously read posts.

Play: