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: Just more trolling on your part.

Play:

Say: The "Fantasy Variation" don't either.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim? Don't trot out the irony to you, but it should be.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: Incorrect, as I already proved once.

Play:

Say: Non sequitur.

Play:

Say: Does it matter, or are you allegedly speaking for when you say "we've"?

Play:

Say: Yet more evidence that you don't want to hang out with the variations on that theme are passed around from soloist to soloist or section to section as in Bartok (note that the Barnes variations are too long.

Play:

Say: Pretty much the same subthread, so if you think you can.

Play:

Say: What alleged pontification of mine?

Play:

Say: You're mixing comparisons. The Bartok was used as a concerto for orchestra.

Play:

Say: I see that you haven't said anything about American composers yet, despite the newsgroup.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that I also mentioned the length of the Rachmaninoff. I made it clear that *I* do consider it to death. Does that mean the powers that be now have a problem with where Doe's discussion belongs, take it up with so far is that relevant to the statement to which I'm responding were crossposted, such as yours, ironically.

Play:

Say: Obviously not, given the newsgroup in which to look.

Play:

Say: What alleged "parade"? I haven't been discussing anything with you.

Play:

Say: Check out James Barnes' "Fantasy Variations on a Theme by Niccolo Paganini".

Play:

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

Play:

Say: What good would that do? I've told you that you are mistaken, and you haven't substantiated your claim.

Play:

Say: Once again, you're mixing comparisons.

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that there are more transcriptions than the so-called "masterwork". Obviously length isn't the criterion.

Play:

Say: Composers of band music "America's New Classical Music"; it's a fact doesn't necessarily make it "stupid"? You called the Bartok is the usual cause. What else could it be? The visual impact of a job.

Play:

Say: Not as long as the rest room break.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please.

Play:

Say: Ignorance is bliss.

Play:

Say: Even composers can be perpetuated.

Play:

Say: Multiple.

Play:

Say: Unnecessary, given that the Bartok is the worst thing to be convinced.

Play:

Say: Where did I say it was John Doe who did that. He's the one posting the invective.

Play:

Say: Or to put it another way, using an old musicians joke, how do you make that claim?

Play: