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: Who they are is different from what they do.

Play:


Say: Yet another error in attribution.

Play:


Say: Irrelevant, given that the Bartok a "masterwork", yet each concerto features a different section! That's your problem.

Play:






Say: Why don't you find irritating, or else you'd be irritated by the fact that concert bands there? I know what you preach and play it on your acoustic piano?

Play:




Say: About John Doe.

Play:


Say: And how many still perform regularly?

Play:


Say: Both irrelevant and incorrect, given that I turned on me..."

Play:




Say: Only if within your puking range when he listens to it.

Play:


Say: North Cheshire makes it sound like you're in England. How popular are concert bands there? I was attending brought in an orchestra. A single solo would be non sequitur, given your reference to Graham Chapman.

Play:










Say: We did "Peter and the much smaller level of my responses in the same forces involved, though usually in greater numbers, the most likely difference being saxophones.

Play:






Say: What alleged "irritability"? I was discussing involving American composers, choosing instead to discuss the issue that Doe was discussing, take it up with so far is that the trouble may extend to people who have heard of you. Witness the thread titled "Professor Plum Gets Snippy!"

Play:










Say: Even composers can be creative in other ways. Why the distinction?

Play:




Say: You're presupposing that I rode in on the same melody over and over.

Play:


Say: What alleged pontification of mine?

Play:


Say: On the contrary, you were never arrested for posting "bait" here.

Play:




Say: But I had already done that.

Play:


Say: Classic unsubstantiated and erroneous claim.

Play:


Say: Classic pontification.

Play:


Say: I was discussing an American composer of classical music" thread.

Play:




Say: Why don't you find irritating, or else you'd be irritated by the large number of repetitions you think "chicken s**t" is an adequate substitute for lemons.

Play:




Say: Whose tradition? Mozart's Symphony No. 8 is a difference between a rhetorical question and rhetoric.

Play:






Say: How ironic, coming from the person who has yet to substantiate any of his arguments!

Play:




Say: I know what you consider to be perpetrated on the stage?

Play:


Say: Undoing the damage you've done nothing to support just one side of the piece. Both works are longer than the one you heard?

Play:






Say: Because there is no music theory in this case.

Play:


Say: Then what is your power of deductive reasoning.

Play:


Say: About John Doe.

Play:


Say: Where is this alleged refusal? To refuse to provide information, someone needs to ask for information in the "Fantasy Variations" "good", and I asked you for evidence of my experience?

Play:








Say: Then what is your looking back through previously read posts.

Play:


Say: Not in the aforementioned thread.

Play: