The Troll Variations
for a soloist
by
Tom Duff
Reload for a new version!

Instructions

This piece is for a soloist playing any instrument.

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.

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: That's also your problem.

Play:


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

Play:


Say: Where is this alleged refusal? To refuse to provide information, someone needs to ask for information in the aforementioned thread.

Play:




Say: Note: no response.

Play:


Say: That's your problem.

Play:


Say: Note: no response.

Play:


Say: What alleged "parade"? I haven't suggested that everyone here listen.

Play:




Say: Yet another attribution problem.

Play:


Say: No, they were about music, when in fact they were about crossposting and such.

Play:




Say: Different theme; the Rachmaninoff is the worst thing to ever be perpetrated on the E-flat soprano clarinet. The Tokyo Kosei musician handled the sustained notes amazingly well.

Play:








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

Play:


Say: But they do need to clear fluid from their typewriter, but repetitive stress syndrome is now recognized as a non-rhetorical question.

Play:




Say: The address had jbayer in it. What is truly shallow here is your power of deductive reasoning.

Play:




Say: Classic invective, as expected from someone else, which doesn't change the fact that your claim of speciousness is itself specious.

Play:






Say: Which part of my argument is allegedly "quite meaningless"?

Play:


Say: Wasn't Malcolm Arnold vice president for a closer or encore, Paul Hart's "Cartoon" is delightful.

Play:






Say: Do you instantly go into "dislike mode" whenever an orchestra plays a section of music where the strings aren't playing?

Play:




Say: Famous last words.

Play:


Say: I'm sure that no bait was provided.

Play:


Say: On the contrary, you asked to be "tough going"?

Play:


Say: John who? There are many places in New England that copy names from England.

Play:




Say: And how is a story about him threatening to forbid wind performances of his arguments!

Play:




Say: Which I have yet to substantiate any of his music because "bands so bastardize it that orchestras will never play it again."

Play:






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

Play:


Say: Why is that? There are pieces written for orchestra that exclude the string section. Do you consider the "Fantasy Variations".

Play:




Say: I'm not the one posting the invective.

Play:


Say: On what basis do you get two violists to play that piece and make it "stupid"? You called the piece didn't have "Variations" in the discussion is occurring.

Play:






Say: Bingo, though they might prefer the term "symphony", there is no astrology department at UH.

Play:




Say: On what basis do you call twelve accordions at the same melody over and over and over, and you haven't changed your antagonistic attitude.

Play:






Say: I suggest you listen to the theme), and I assume that the comparison is restricted to how the variation jumps from instrument to instrument or section to section, just as in the title either!

Play: