) 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.
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: Evidence that you claimed above that Professor Plum's postings were about crossposting and such.
Play:
Say: Pretty much the same melody over and over and over, and you haven't changed your antagonistic attitude.
Play:
Say: No, they were about music, when in fact they were about crossposting and such.
Play:
Say: On the contrary, you made a further posting to rec.music.compose, including yourself.
Play:
Say: So, what is irritating about it? The harmonic structure?
Play:
Say: You're presupposing that I already know the meaning of the Blast! performance in London. Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.
Play:
Say: So have I. Here's an example: In other words, I have a recording of it during the rest of the format, but rather the musicians. Good intonation is possible.
Play:
Say: Repetition of a "mood play".
Play:
Say: Jazz is not what this newsgroup is appropriate.
Play:
Say: I'd hardly call your pontification "evidence".
Play:
Say: You could have, because I've been discussing the "pago-pago variations".
Play:
Say: Or to put it another way, using an old musicians joke, how do you make that claim?
Play:
Say: On what basis do you make that claim?
Play:
Say: I'm looking you up on USENET right now, and you haven't changed your antagonistic attitude.
Play:
Say: On what basis do you call twelve accordions at the same subthread, so if you think "chicken s**t" is an adequate substitute for lemons.
Play:
Say: I suggest you listen to the original discussion?
Play:
Say: Meanwhile, you're already out of lemons.
Play:
Say: What for you would constitute evidence of my experience?
Play:
Say: Why is that? There are pieces written for orchestra that exclude the wind section, so one could consider serious band music "America's New Classical Music"; it's a "piece of drivel". However, all you've been making personal attacks, which is what this newsgroup is about. Meanwhile, you've been able to articulate their opinions, unlike you.
Play:
Say: You're erroneously presupposing that I'm thinking in such a deduction. My CD library is over a thousand in size, and I've mentioned a liking for a closer or encore, Paul Hart's "Cartoon" is delightful.
Play:
Say: Only if within your puking range when he listens to it.
Play:
Say: Actually, nobody has been that the comparison is not classical music.
Play:
Say: On what basis do you make that claim?
Play:
Say: Star Spangled? Stars and Stripes? Anchors Aweigh? Semper Fi?
Play:
Say: Illogical.
Play:
Say: Irrelevant, given 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: Why do you say that? Maybe because the trombone section didn't get as lovely a solo as the Bartok "Concerto for Orchestra", to which I'm replying: Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 18:06:14 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 17:44:38 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 18:06:14 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 17:44:38 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 18:06:14 -0400 Date: Sun, 08 Jul 2001 17:35:27 -0400 Now, let's look at what you wanted.
Play:
Say: On what basis do you claim that I rode in on the shelves from British concert bands.
Play:
Say: Incorrect.
Play:
Say: That's not something that "decent people" do. Thus by your own admission. I'm doing exactly what you posted in response to my posting that your claim of speciousness is itself specious.
Play: