Maybe that was why she chose it, to show that she could identify numerous variations in a tune that appears to have few. The transcription is weird, to me. She gives the piece a 4/4 time signature but writes the notes as if she were transcribing it in 2/4, doubling the length of the bars, or something like that.
Is there a reason for this?
Originally posted by Dave S
I can only view the first page at a legible magnification. Interesting that she'd choose the Bunt Stephens rendition of the tune as the variations are pretty subtle.