Composer Memes

[ajspiano]

Best one I've found..  granted I didn't look too hard, or try to make one myself...



...well I laughed. - Because I hated writing in 4 part vocal style when I was 12 and I felt a little bit like my teacher might have done this when marking my theory.

[j_menz]

[candlelightpiano]

Best one I've found..  granted I didn't look too hard, or try to make one myself...



...well I laughed. - Because I hated writing in 4 part vocal style when I was 12 and I felt a little bit like my teacher might have done this when marking my theory.

I completely agree with you, AJ!!  

I like this one as I love Philip Glass:

[49410enrique]

i've always thought these things were sort of funny (the clever ones at least).

[49410enrique]

[49410enrique]

super clever.

[perprocrastinate]

Best one I've found..  granted I didn't look too hard, or try to make one myself...



...well I laughed. - Because I hated writing in 4 part vocal style when I was 12 and I felt a little bit like my teacher might have done this when marking my theory.

Don't forget the one you used to make fun of Rach fanboy.

[49410enrique]

PS bonus
feels appropirate if not slightly ot, but i think we can relate.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

[ajspiano]

hahah awesome, I wasnt sure if many people would post here..

Love the "don't fugue it up one" for some reason.

For the "what I really do one" - if it were strictly about me it would have a teacher/student cartoon..

..........

me: What note does is say on the score?

student: "F#"

me: great, so what note are you playing?

student: oh.

[davidjosepha]

me: What note does is say on the score?

student: "F#"

me: great, so what note are you playing?

student: oh.

idiot kid was playing a G flat, wasn't he?

[j_menz]

[zezhyrule]

That one is great xD

[ajspiano]

first world amateur pianist problems...





Genius's and their successes..



Classical snobs..




Arrogant Bmus student who subsequently fails final exams and turns out to know jack-all.



...must log off mememaker.net

[j_menz]

Genius's and their successes..

Oh come on, Wolfie was 8 before he wrote his first symphony - this kid is just a try hard!

[ajspiano]

Oh come on, Wolfie was 8 before he wrote his first symphony - this kid is just a try hard!

There were no pictures of 8 yr olds doing a fist pump.

[49410enrique]

(prolly only funny if you watch the show this guy frequents as 'expert' on the History Channel...)
i literally laughed out loud



oh Arnie....you'll never change






PS

[davidjosepha]

oh Arnie....you'll never change

This is the only one I've laughed at in the entire thread. Excellent.

[ajspiano]

I laughed at the twitter one..  not the bowl/serial one.. I get it now though (google) - I've tried really hard to remain underexposed to that particular artist..

[unholeee]

i like the twitter one, laughed at ray charles - probably because its childish.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

All of you know this is true!

[j_menz]

All of you know this is true!

Really? What else should one do? 

[fftransform]

Ok.


Now somebody post one that's actually funny.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

This is what happened to me last week.  I was soooo freaking mad!!!

[brianvds]

[chopin2015]

https://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ll7410QjNz1qidrmwo1_400.png

[49410enrique]

in no particular order








PS

[ajspiano]

Ok.


Now somebody post one that's actually funny.

[fftransform]

One might learn how to spell "accommodate" before presuming the ability to do so.

[davidjosepha]

One might learn how to spell "accommodate" before presuming the ability to do so.

One might also use unpretentious syntax more common in the 20th and 21st centuries when talking. Also, he "presumed" his inability to do so, not his ability to do so.

[fftransform]

One might also use unpretentious syntax more common in the 20th and 21st centuries when talking. Also, he "presumed" his inability to do so, not his ability to do so.

One might take note of the dialect of the post to which I was responding, in conjunction with acquainting oneself with the correct definition of "syntax."  This, of course, so as to avoid its misuse in any additional run-on sentences, particularly ones which erroneously contain the phrase "common in," as opposed to the correct "common to."

All of that regardless of the fact that the refusal to accommodate does not imply the inability to do so.  As an exercise in futility, perhaps you could try to find a way to be even more thoroughly wrong in your response.

[zezhyrule]

Yay this thread already turned into some dude complaining about grammar. Whoo!

[davidjosepha]

One might take note of the dialect of the post to which I was responding, in conjunction with acquainting oneself with the correct definition of "syntax."

The post you were responding to used common syntax. "One does not" could be replaced by "A person does not", but both are common. And perhaps you should look up the definition of syntax, since I used the word correctly. Dialect is a combination of syntax and diction. Either way, "One might..." is not an opening to a sentence used by anyone who lives in the 21st century (and recognizes that fact).

This, of course, so as to avoid its misuse in any additional run-on sentences, particularly ones which erroneously contain the phrase "common in," as opposed to the correct "common to."

My sentence is not a run-on. I think the term you're looking for is sentence fragment, but it's not that either. One is the subject, might the verb, and the rest is what one might do. "Common in" works just as well as "common to" in this case.

All of that regardless of the fact that the refusal to accommodate does not imply the inability to do so.

Sentence fragment

Also, the image implies he is unable to by referencing the Fellowship's inability to just walk into Mordor (definitely not their refusal).

As an exercise in futility, perhaps you could try to find a way to be even more thoroughly wrong in your response.

 

[davidjosepha]

Yay this thread already turned into some dude complaining about grammar. Whoo!

The best part is he doesn't seem to know a thing about grammar. Let's get back to the dumb image macros!

[wilsonl]

This is what happened to me last week.  I was soooo freaking mad!!!

Kill your teacher with fire!!!!  hahahahahahahaha...
Surely I'm prefer to hear Rachmaninoff than Bach.

[chadbrochill17]

This is what happened to me last week.  I was soooo freaking mad!!!

wait, rachforever is complaining about having to play Bach and praising Rachmaninoff? Man if only you had professed your love for Valentina Lisitsa you would have gotten the hat-trick.

[rachmaninoff_forever]

Ok.


Now somebody post one that's actually funny.

[ajspiano]

Also, he "presumed" his inability to do so, not his ability to do so.

I rather thought the context of "One does not simply" made this quite obvious as the general meaning of my post.. I guess not.. 

Funnily enough, the spelling complaint and grammar war that ensued rather proves the point doesn't it. One does not simply accommodate a unique sense of humour without prior knowledge of it, as proved by fftransform's lack of amusement - but then again, I was hardly trying to make him laugh.

That aside, apologies about some of my pictures not appearing in the thread any more, no idea why the links are breaking - something to do with memecreator.org I think.

.........anyway, since posting in an semi-argumentative way is not something I generally like to do, perhaps I can lighten it up with a fairly weak maths joke..

"I don't always post multiple lots negativity in a PS thread, but when I do, I find its a positive experience"

[davidjosepha]

That aside, apologies about some of my pictures not appearing in the thread any more, no idea why the links are breaking - something to do with memecreator.org I think.

Yeh, they only host the files temporarily (not quite sure how long after creation), so you have to upload them to another site like imgur.com

[perprocrastinate]

For all the non musicians out there. Oh wait, why would they be here in the first place?

[fftransform]

"I don't always post multiple lots negativity in a PS thread, but when I do, I find its a positive experience"

Use www.sadpanda.us to host your images.

[49410enrique]

[fftransform]

Hello,

The post you were responding to used common syntax. "One does not" could be replaced by "A person does not", but both are common.

Why have you capitalized "A"?  Also, why do you have a comma outside of a quotation mark?  If the post I was responding to had "common syntax," whatever you think that means, then please explain why you posted this, in response to me:

One might also use unpretentious syntax more common in the 20th and 21st centuries when talking.

Or are you referring to the second line, then?  Because there is absolutely nothing incorrect about the second line, nor does it sound dated.  It is, simply, somewhat technical, hence your apparent unfamiliarity with the construction.  However, using the royal we/one is very outdated; I guess I gave you too much credit.  Silly me, assuming you knew what you were talking about.  I definitely won't ever make that mistake again.

And perhaps you should look up the definition of syntax, since I used the word correctly.  Dialect is a combination of syntax and diction.

Actually, you didn't use the word correctly.  I'd tell you to look it up, but I assume that you already have, and simply failed to understand the nuance of the word.  Do you even know what "grammar" actually means?

https://learn-language-online.com/language-parts-of-speech/grammar-and-syntax

https://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_dialect_and_diction

Either way, "One might..." is not an opening to a sentence used by anyone who lives in the 21st century (and recognizes that fact).

Oh, so it was "one might" that you were referring to!  In which case, your argument is that "one does" is an acceptable and contemporary construction, whereas "one might" is not.  Do you realize how stupid that is (you probably don't)?  What about "one might do"?  Please explain to me why "one does" and "one might" are so different to you.

My sentence is not a run-on.

Let's check:

One might also use unpretentious syntax more common in the 20th and 21st centuries when talking.

Hey look, it's a run-on after all.

I think the term you're looking for is sentence fragment, but it's not that either.

Let's add "run-on" and "sentence fragment" to the list of linguistic terms you don't know the definitions of.

"Common in" works just as well as "common to" in this case.

Oh look, another run-on sentence.  And you are wrong; what are we "in"?

Sentence fragment

"Sentence fragment" is a sentence fragment.  And where is your punctuation?  By the way,

All of that regardless of the fact that the refusal to accommodate does not imply the inability to do so.

Hey look, it's not a sentence fragment after all.  What a shock: You're wrong again.  Who would have believed it?

Also, the image implies he is unable to by referencing the Fellowship's inability to just walk into Mordor (definitely not their refusal).

Your run-on sentence implies that you don't learn.  Unable to what?  I do not care about any extra-contextual intension vis-a-vis the Tolkien books; I am only referring to the intention.  You do know the difference between intension and intention, correct?

[perprocrastinate]

Jeez guys, give it a rest. Do you really win anything special going to all this trouble to correct each other's grammar/punctuation mistakes?

[49410enrique]

[mikeowski]

[fftransform]

[fftransform]

[perprocrastinate]

I believe it is actually pronounced that way, haha.

[davidjosepha]

Why have you capitalized "A"?  Also, why do you have a comma outside of a quotation mark?  If the post I was responding to had "common syntax," whatever you think that means, then please explain why you posted this, in response to me:

I capitalized "A" because it is the start of a sentence, or would be, if the words in quotations were used to replace "One does not". I use punctuation outside of quotations when the punctuation is not a part of the quoted text (as you also did, in the first sentence of what I'm quoting here) as the British do because it makes more sense, although yes, I would use the accepted way in American English if I were turning in a graded essay.

If the post I was responding to had "common syntax," whatever you think that means, then please explain why you posted this, in response to me:

Or are you referring to the second line, then?  Because there is absolutely nothing incorrect about the second line, nor does it sound dated.  It is, simply, somewhat technical, hence your apparent unfamiliarity with the construction.  However, using the royal we/one is very outdated; I guess I gave you too much credit.  Silly me, assuming you knew what you were talking about.  I definitely won't ever make that mistake again.

I copied your syntax as a form of mockery. You're familiar, I take it?

Actually, you didn't use the word correctly.  I'd tell you to look it up, but I assume that you already have, and simply failed to understand the nuance of the word.  Do you even know what "grammar" actually means?

https://learn-language-online.com/language-parts-of-speech/grammar-and-syntax

https://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_dialect_and_diction

Ah, Wiki Answers, the most reliable source of information available on the internet, besides, maybe, Yahoo! Answers. I'll ignore that link, and just respond to the first:

"So basically, the most important aspect of syntax is to govern the interconnection of parts of speech to make sentences that make sense."

I'll try to limit myself to the 1000 most common words in English when explaining this so you don't get confused.

"One might" is an order of words that is used to give a certain meaning to the sentence. In other words, it is ordering the words to make sentences that make sense. This ordering of words is called "syntax".

Oh, so it was "one might" that you were referring to!  In which case, your argument is that "one does" is an acceptable and contemporary construction, whereas "one might" is not.  Do you realize how stupid that is (you probably don't)?  What about "one might do"?  Please explain to me why "one does" and "one might" are so different to you.

It's quoting a movie, or book (I don't recall if this exact line shows up in the book), where talking like that, in an archaic way, is intentional in order to give it a more grand feel.

Let's check:

Hey look, it's a run-on after all.

No. "One might also use unpretentious syntax more common in the 20th and 21st centuries when talking."

One is the subject, might is the auxiliary verb, use is the infinitive used after the auxiliary, syntax is the direct object, "in the 20th and 21st centuries" is a prepositional phrase, and "when talking" defines the moment this is taking place.

Let's add "run-on" and "sentence fragment" to the list of linguistic terms you don't know the definitions of.

"Run-on" means it has 2 or more independent clauses without some sort of conjunction or transition. "Sentence fragment" means there isn't even one independent clause. Where is the second independent clause in my sentence?

Oh look, another run-on sentence.  And you are wrong; what are we "in"?

We are living in the 21st century. I also don't like that we don't have a separate word for a time period that we are in, but unfortunately, I didn't get to write the English language.

And no, not a run on sentence.

"'Common in' works just as well as 'common to' in this case."

[Noun 1] works as well as [Noun 2] in this case. No run-on here.

"Sentence fragment" is a sentence fragment.  And where is your punctuation?  By the way,

It is only a sentence fragment if you think it was supposed to be a sentence, and, without the presence of any verb of any form, it seems unlikely that was intentional. Me labeling your sentence fragment a sentence fragment is no more a sentence fragment than a street sign saying "1st St." is a sentence fragment. I don't need punctuation since this is not a sentence, nor is it intended to be.

Hey look, it's not a sentence fragment after all.  What a shock: You're wrong again.  Who would have believed it?

"All of that regardless of the fact that [not an important part of the sentence]."

No sentence there, sorry!

Your run-on sentence implies that you don't learn.  Unable to what?  I do not care about any extra-contextual intension vis-a-vis the Tolkien books; I am only referring to the intention.  You do know the difference between intension and intention, correct?

He's unable to accomodate your clearly non-existent sense of humor. That part is unnecessary to repeat since I was responding to your sentence fragment about the refusal to accomodate. And again, this is not a run-on sentence.


This is kinda fun! If I didn't know any better, I'd think you actually believed half the things you're saying.