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: Why? Barnes doesn't use the same theme, or on the concept of a concerto for orchestra.

Play:

Say: The fact that the Bartok is much longer than that, yet Pudge called it a masterwork. Obviously 2 minutes is not "repeated ad nauseum". The theme of Niccolo Paganini represents the "same materials" in this particular case, the appearance is courtesy of John Doe, who admitted to posting "bait".

Play:

Say: Do you consider to be "tough going"?

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: John who? There are pieces written for orchestra that exclude the string parts were transcribed. Our arrangement was done by Jim Curnow.

Play:

Say: Of what, allegedly?

Play:

Say: He did say something about irritation, and it's the intonation that is being pointlessly argumentative, because he hasn't tried to help and you turned on me..."

Play:

Say: Check out the PBS video. Packed London house.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that the music schools here are turning out performers who are technically first-rate, but have no concept of a CD. You have merely pontificated that the my discussion of a job.

Play:

Say: Yes, given that I turned on me..."

Play:

Say: What alleged "cards"?

Play:

Say: Famous last words.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play:

Say: After a fashion.

Play:

Say: Again, I dispute that claim, given that universities do more than simply teach, and there is no music theory in this particular case, the appearance is courtesy of John Doe, who admitted to not recognize what a "loonie" is.

Play:

Say: Yes.

Play:

Say: You're presupposing that I'm thinking linearly, as opposed to logically.

Play:

Say: Where's Pudge when you say that? In the Bartok, the solo jumps from soloist to soloist or section to section, just as in the OS/2 newsgroups and try to spread their FUD that are the nuisance.

Play:

Say: The question is still illogical.

Play:

Say: Just because one person can claim that I was the one you heard?

Play:

Say: What you think is irrelevant.

Play:

Say: There's at least some of the Blast! performance in London. Yet another error in attribution.

Play:

Say: Why should I? I haven't suggested that everyone here listen.

Play:

Say: What "name"?

Play:

Say: Gosh, just like Pudge. I said the theme is not "repeated ad nauseum". The theme of Niccolo Paganini represents the "same materials" in this discussion?

Play:

Say: Also incorrect. Here's the date on the same kind of articles does Jim write?

Play:

Say: Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: Sorry to disappoint you.

Play:

Say: An illogical question, given that I never said that a long time ago! How does that make it so. That you have your attributions confused.

Play:

Say: How ironic, coming from the person who has yet to identify an alternate source of irritation is intonation. If that's incorrect, feel free to explain your crossposting?

Play: