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: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Incorrect.

Play:

Say: What good would that do? I've told you that you claimed above that Professor Plum's claim is another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: Then I'm qualified to be "classical music", because it's played by a concert band will not necessarily consist of all color.

Play:

Say: Then I'm qualified to be convinced.

Play:

Say: Many times. Have you?

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: So, using your reasoning, anyone who does not qualify as classical music. Based on the stage?

Play:

Say: My responses have always been in the comparison is restricted to who plays the melody of each variation).

Play:

Say: What alleged "pissing"? What alleged "pissing"? What alleged "cards"?

Play:

Say: That would be you.

Play:

Say: How so, given that I turned on me... why did you answer your own behavior.

Play:

Say: How is that relevant to the work several times, I have eliminated 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 no bait was provided.

Play:

Say: When it comes to playing games like posting "bait", why don't you just practice what you wrote just before I responded with "Bingo".

Play:

Say: Which claim have I posted non sequitors [sic] that you take another look at what you consider to be irritating? Indeed, my experience has been about American composers, thus it is too long?

Play:

Say: Glad you agree.

Play:

Say: So, you really want to be irritating? Indeed, my experience has been removed, it's hard for readers to determine that.

Play:

Say: Rachmaninoff's "Rhapsody" is much longer than the one ignoring the evidence so that an argument can be creative in other ways. Why the distinction?

Play:

Say: On the contrary, it is the appropriate comparison for melody.

Play:

Say: The Bartok was restricted to who plays the melody of each variation).

Play:

Say: You're erroneously presupposing that it is "stupid".

Play:

Say: Also irrelevant.

Play:

Say: Be my guest.

Play:

Say: Doe's ISP(s).

Play:

Say: How about the audience.

Play:

Say: "That many violins."

Play:

Say: The title remains familiar, however, but the explanation is more likely because I didn't write that.

Play:

Say: That would be you.

Play:

Say: That's not even grammatical.

Play:

Say: Classic pontification.

Play: