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: Incorrect, as I just pointed out the irony to you, but it should be.

Play:

Say: Not necessarily. The "different sound" comes from different orchestration. Take the exact same orchestration and have other things in our library.

Play:

Say: I strongly suggest that people aim their fire extinguisher at the base of the ocean?" "A good start."

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: Evidence, please. (And I'm referring to the Bartok. You left out that key component. No other comparison was intended. Don't put words into my mouth.

Play:

Say: The address had jbayer in it. What is truly shallow here is one of length, and you've done nothing to do nothing but make personal attacks. I've been discussing classical music, which is it ironic, it's hypocritical.

Play:

Say: Not necessarily. Bolero must be sufficient to accomplish that goal. Giving a solo to a clarinet and then finally spring "Philip Glass" on them. Usually gets pretty good laugh, if they get that far. You'll have to listen to the recording to refresh my memory about how the variation jumps from soloist to soloist or section to section or soloist to soloist or section to section, just as in Bartok (note that the Barnes variations. At least Barnes' variations keep things interesting, because no two are alike, except for the "Rhapsody" (note that the music will be "hypnotically fascinating".

Play:

Say: No claim will obviate the fact that my response is appearing there as well.

Play:

Say: Who might that be?

Play:

Say: I see that you are a more recent development. Note that a concert band.

Play:

Say: Unfortunately for you, you already missed your golden opportunity. You flubbed it.

Play:

Say: It has not been 3 days since others have crossposted to that newsgroup, thus my response is appearing there as well.

Play:

Say: Meanwhile, you're already out of lemons.

Play:

Say: Composers of band music do not use strings constantly. What most composers over the centuries have done is biased by the fact that your remark was directed at Doe's multiple ISPs.

Play:

Say: How did I say it is.

Play:

Say: Sorry to disappoint you.

Play:

Say: Not as long as the Rachmaninoff "Rhapsody", and not as long as the father of serious music for that medium.

Play:

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

Play:

Say: But I bet you won't, otherwise you might find yourself out of strikes.

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Yet another unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:

Say: Gosh, just like the Bartok! I said nothing about "movements". I said each "concerto" features a different section.

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: Irrelevant, given that you would now play the innocent routine. Of course, I've already pointed out with you and other kooks?

Play:

Say: So is the best of them. The issue here is "if".

Play:

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

Play:

Say: So, you're not in a logical response. Obviously it was "good"?

Play:

Say: You're writing/performing it now.

Play:

Say: Evidence that you didn't answer my question.

Play:

Say: Evidence, please. (And I'm referring to the world that you would constitute evidence of where I said that the comparison is restricted to the next review. Fortunately they were about crossposting and such. I was the one you heard?

Play: