Examples: elegy only (before/after pair)
Browse files
.gitattributes
CHANGED
|
@@ -4,3 +4,5 @@
|
|
| 4 |
output_examples/elegy_in_c_sharp_minor_performed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
| 5 |
output_examples/fantaisie_01_score_as_composed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
| 6 |
output_examples/fantaisie_02_performed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
output_examples/elegy_in_c_sharp_minor_performed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
| 5 |
output_examples/fantaisie_01_score_as_composed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
| 6 |
output_examples/fantaisie_02_performed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
| 7 |
+
output_examples/elegy_01_score_as_composed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
| 8 |
+
output_examples/elegy_02_performed.mp3 filter=lfs diff=lfs merge=lfs -text
|
output_examples/README.md
CHANGED
|
@@ -1,37 +1,27 @@
|
|
| 1 |
# Output examples
|
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
-
|
| 4 |
-
|
| 5 |
-
played*.
|
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
-
|
|
|
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
| file | |
|
| 10 |
|---|---|
|
| 11 |
-
| `
|
| 12 |
-
| `
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
-
##
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
-
|
| 17 |
-
|
| 18 |
-
|
| 19 |
-
|
| 20 |
-
|
| 21 |
-
Both were composed plan-driven: the model states a theme, develops it (fragmenting, inverting,
|
| 22 |
-
transposing, augmenting) and brings it back transformed.
|
| 23 |
-
|
| 24 |
-
## Why the pairs matter
|
| 25 |
-
|
| 26 |
-
Play the fantaisie's `01` and then `02`. The gap between them is the most useful thing we learned
|
| 27 |
-
building this model: **a dry-sounding symbolic generation is usually not a composition failure but an
|
| 28 |
-
unperformed one.** Pitch content and performance are separable layers, and the performance layer
|
| 29 |
-
carries far more of the perceived quality than we expected.
|
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
There's an acoustic reason as well as a musical one. Staggering a chord's attacks by roughly 20β70 ms
|
| 32 |
spreads its beating partials out in time, which measurably lowers sensory roughness, so rolled chords
|
| 33 |
aren't merely more expressive than struck ones, they're *cleaner*. Quantising a dense passage onto a
|
| 34 |
grid makes it rougher, not just stiffer.
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-
|
| 37 |
-
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
# Output examples
|
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
+
**Elegy in C-sharp minor** β 608 notes, every one composed by the model (plan-driven: it states a
|
| 4 |
+
theme, develops it by fragmenting, inverting and transposing, then brings it back transformed).
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
+
Both files below contain **identical pitches**. Nothing was added, removed or re-pitched. The only
|
| 7 |
+
difference is *how they are played*.
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
| file | |
|
| 10 |
|---|---|
|
| 11 |
+
| `elegy_01_score_as_composed.mid` / `.mp3` | raw model output: no pedal, near-flat velocities, onsets square on the beat |
|
| 12 |
+
| `elegy_02_performed.mid` / `.mp3` | the same 608 notes performed β melody voiced above the accompaniment, chords rolled by choice, rubato around a felt pulse, 196 pedal events caught at harmony changes |
|
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
+
## Why the pair matters
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
+
Play `01` and then `02`. The gap between them is the most useful thing we learned building this
|
| 17 |
+
model: **a dry-sounding symbolic generation is usually not a composition failure but an unperformed
|
| 18 |
+
one.** Pitch content and performance are separable layers, and performance carries far more of the
|
| 19 |
+
perceived quality than we expected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
There's an acoustic reason as well as a musical one. Staggering a chord's attacks by roughly 20β70 ms
|
| 22 |
spreads its beating partials out in time, which measurably lowers sensory roughness, so rolled chords
|
| 23 |
aren't merely more expressive than struck ones, they're *cleaner*. Quantising a dense passage onto a
|
| 24 |
grid makes it rougher, not just stiffer.
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
+
If you're evaluating this model (or any symbolic music model) on raw output, you're hearing about
|
| 27 |
+
half of what's there.
|
output_examples/{fantaisie_01_score_as_composed.mp3 β elegy_01_score_as_composed.mp3}
RENAMED
|
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
|
|
| 1 |
version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
|
| 2 |
-
oid sha256:
|
| 3 |
-
size
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
|
| 2 |
+
oid sha256:217188f3a7b79ebec5ff10e2cd5f292cbadb539881422826cb00348ee5b92b55
|
| 3 |
+
size 2846973
|
output_examples/{fantaisie_02_performed.mp3 β elegy_02_performed.mp3}
RENAMED
|
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
|
|
| 1 |
version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
|
| 2 |
-
oid sha256:
|
| 3 |
-
size
|
|
|
|
| 1 |
version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1
|
| 2 |
+
oid sha256:e2625d4faef31573c9289c8739a5f331f87c5b73d52daf6fdc6d8dd1062b00f9
|
| 3 |
+
size 3145395
|