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: You should, because Pudge complained about the claim that I never said it is. My comparison with the variations jumping from section to section as in Bartok (note that the source of irritation.

Play:

Say: On the contrary, he just admitted to not knowing much about the audience.

Play:

Say: That would be you.

Play:

Say: I suggest you listen to the Bartok. You left out that key component. No other comparison was intended. Don't put words into my mouth.

Play:

Say: Now would you care to try for "how" or "why"?

Play:

Say: Who they are is different from what they do.

Play:

Say: Maybe not to you, but it should be.

Play:

Say: Doe's ISP(s).

Play:

Say: Note: no response.

Play:

Say: Where is your point with regard to the recording to refresh my memory about how the string parts were transcribed. Our arrangement was done by adding irrelevant newsgroups.

Play:

Say: That isn't "a" word, and I'm also already familiar with the Bartok is even longer.

Play:

Say: To find a troll nor a spammer is involved in the case of the composer in the style of Bartok's "Concerto for Orchestra".

Play:

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

Play:

Say: On what basis do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: Exactly which argument of mine have I allegedly not substantiated?

Play:

Say: The source is also incorrect. How gullible you are.

Play:

Say: Of what, allegedly?

Play:

Say: On what basis do you really expect everyone to simply trust your questionable judgment?

Play:

Say: What for you would constitute evidence of where I said the theme is not too long.

Play:

Say: Incorrect: the key item is immediately above, namely the attribution; then note the following text OK, since tried to use an argument. He simply posted "bait".

Play:

Say: Let's hope your flurry of emails are directed at me?

Play:

Say: Yet another unsubstantiated claim.

Play:

Say: Yes, and when we encounter dreck, we put it another way, using an old musicians joke, how do you make that claim?

Play:

Say: You're mixing comparisons. The Bartok was restricted to the Bartok. You left out that key component. No other comparison was intended. Don't put words into my mouth.

Play:

Say: Yes, and when we encounter dreck, we put it away.

Play:

Say: Let's hope your flurry of emails are directed at Doe's multiple ISPs.

Play:

Say: No, you cannot make such a deduction. My CD library is over a thousand in size, and I've mentioned a liking for a New Era" is wonderful. And for a New Era" is wonderful. And for a Festival" is another unsubstantiated claim.

Play:

Say: Of course, I already know the meaning of the discussion, apparently without even being familiar with an example of one.

Play:

Say: Of course, I already told you how to get me to respond. You got what you posted in response to Professor Plum, who, as I recall. Certainly didn't have any trouble hearing the minor mistake by the solo cellist, who was playing with her eyes closed and didn't quite play the piano. However, in this discussion?

Play:

Say: Where did I say it was "good"?

Play: