Saul, David:

Musikalisches Würfelspiel

 

Mark

 

From: lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr....@gnu.org 
<lilypond-user-bounces+carsonmark=ca.rr....@gnu.org> On Behalf Of Saul Tobin
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2024 6:40 PM
To: David Olson <dadadha...@dslextreme.com>
Cc: lilypond-user <lilypond-user@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Das Glasperlenspiel coding question

 

First of all, I just want to say I love almost everything about this, and 
especially I love the Hermann Hesse reference!

 

I am quite curious what you mean by saying you use Lilypond to write poetry. Do 
you mean that you use Guile Scheme to generate the text and use Lilypond to 
typeset it as top level markups, with no musical score?

 

I can see why Lilypond fits the spirit of your literary idea, as a text-based 
format for encoding music, and especially one based on LISP. It would 
definitely be cool to see Lilypond popularized a bit more in that way. That 
said, I can't help but wonder whether specifying the use of Lilypond is 
necessary for your literary purpose. If your reason for specifying the use of 
Lilypond is technical, I outline below some thoughts on its suitability to be 
the language of musical LLMs.

 

I am a bit skeptical that an LLM is actually what you want for your story. LLMs 
as they currently exist need to overcome some major technical hurdles before 
they will be able to compose sheet music competently, which I'll outline below. 
Maybe it can be assumed that for fictional purposes the practical challenges 
are solved, but even then, I wonder if there might be other types of algorithms 
that are a better fit both technically (more thoughts on that below) and in 
spirit. Admittedly my sense of the Glass Bead Game is quite clouded by memory, 
but I would have thought that to get at Hesse's idea, you would want a 
mechanism that is "conscious" of the relationships of ideas, which is pretty 
much the opposite of what an LLM does. For your literary purposes, do you even 
need to specify the type of AI algorithm?

 

Serialist systems are the sort of generating scheme for musical material that 
LLMs are the very worst at, but serialism also lends itself potentially to 
other sorts of AI techniques, such as genetic algorithms. I wonder also if the 
strength of the serialist constraints you place on the output of each 
successive token would in some way render the LLM equivalent to other, non-LLM 
based algorithmic methods; by crude analogy, if I asked an LLM to calculate for 
me the output of some very complicated numerical function, and then performed 
validation filtering out all the incorrect answers, the resulting output would 
be the same as if I had entered that function into a calculator.

 

I wouldn't claim to have a deep understanding of LLMs, but I have played around 
with them quite a bit in trying to get them to generate music in Lilypond 
format. My strong impression is that even a very powerful current-generation 
LLM trained on a large dataset of musical repertoire in a parsable format would 
not be well suited to generating new musical scores, except perhaps if they 
were limited to a single melodic voice. The reason is that while LLMs are 
capable at suggesting appropriate continuations to an existing text, which 
makes them a good tool for some types of creative writing, non-local 
relationships between semantic tokens are a critical aspect of musical scores 
to a degree that they are not in text. LLMs are by design not well equipped, 
for example, to validate that the rhythms in each part add up to the correct 
total durations, or to check harmonic and contrapuntal relationships. Lilypond 
actually makes this particularly hard because Lilypond input files are 
typically written "horizontally," whereas some other notation programs store 
data "vertically" across all instruments measure by measure or beat by beat.

 

In order to suggest a musical continuation of a polyphonic score, the LLM would 
first need to parse the Lilypond code sufficiently to understand what the 
semantic tokens are from a musical perspective across all the simultaneous 
parts, which is quite different than parsing the tokens within the code itself 
or even from parsing the notes and rhythms, since musical ideas can consist of 
complex interrelationships. That said, the same mechanisms that are already 
being developed to allow AIs to, for example, perform logical validation of 
software code or mathematical derivations, will also provide the needed 
baseline capability for composing music. However, music is likely to test AI 
logical reasoning capabilities to a greater extent than even most mathematical 
and engineering use cases, due to the fact that in a musical score, the 
relationship of every note to every single other note in a given passage must 
be considered. 

 

Even if the logical reasoning challenge were solved, that would only bring LLMs 
to the starting line of being able to coherently add a new polyphonic musical 
idea onto an existing sequence of polyphonic musical ideas. But this would be 
the musical equivalent of the type of trite, contentless drivel that GPT-3 was 
famous for. To write actually competent music requires a whole additional set 
of layers of non-local relationships, namely those between ideas. Strong LLMs 
are capable of imitating such relationships in text because they are trained on 
datasets that contain them; if you ask an LLM to write a short story about 
characters named Adam and Eve, it will know that in sentences where the name of 
a person is appropriate, it should prefer one of those names to some arbitrary 
name. But that is not the same thing as knowing that the story is about those 
characters, and the difference becomes apparent in situations where a 
reasonable choice of words based purely on probability leads to nonsense or 
inconsistency. This, it seems to me, is the very sort of understanding that is 
critical to composing music of any quality.

 

Now, it might be that with a sufficiently large training dataset, the model 
would be able to make good enough guesses that its lack of non-local 
understanding wouldn't matter in any practical sense. Clearly that is the case 
at least for certain types of prose writing. But it's difficult for me to 
imagine that being the case with music, simply because even if the entire canon 
of published sheet music were available as training data, that dataset would 
still be orders of magnitude smaller than what is available for prose. Maybe an 
LLM could be expected to compose new Christmas carols, possibly even baroque 
fugues or bel canto arias, but for instance if one wanted it to write a 
completion of the Mozart requiem, I am doubtful that Mozart's catalogue would 
provide sufficient training data for the model to succeed in picking up the 
thread of musical development where Mozart leaves off, let alone to continue 
the thread of development in a convincingly Mozartian manner.

 

On the subject of training data, one might naively think that text based 
formats like Lilypond or MusicXML would be well suited to training LLMs on 
sheet music, since interacting with code is an existing core capability of 
LLMs. Personally, I think this is unlikely to be the path toward a model that 
can actually compose, because the repertoire available in these type of text 
formats is a tiny fraction of published sheet music. In order to create a 
training dataset of sufficient size, either an implausibly large human data 
entry effort would be required, or advanced OCR for sheet music would be 
required. But OCR would probably itself use some type of AI model to do the 
translation into text. And let's remember that Lilypond is ultimately a 
language that is compiled into music notation. So if our AI model is able to 
use OCR to parse sheet music into Lilypond and then write Lilypond that 
compiles into sheet music, which can then be parsed back into Lilypond by the 
AI...why not just let the AI read and write music notation directly? The main 
benefit of Lilypond for algorithmic composition is that the Scheme 
representation of music is useful for programmatic manipulation, but this isn't 
the type of internal representation used by LLMs. All this to say, IMO, if we 
ever get an LLM that can competently compose sheet music, I think it is almost 
certainly going to be trained directly on music notation without the need for a 
text representation of the music.

 

I'm including the list in my reply, since I suspect the overall question of AI 
composing music is of interest. Please pardon my ramblings.

 

Saul

 

On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 4:45 PM David Olson <dadadha...@dslextreme.com 
<mailto:dadadha...@dslextreme.com> > wrote:

Dear Lilypond Composers,

 

Questions are regularly posed on this list that suggest that many Lilyponders 
are composers who use Lilypond to generate music based on creative conceptions, 
rather than the traditional way. 

I'm writing a faux-philosophical novel in which characters occasionally speak 
speculatively about Hermann Hesse's "glass bead game". It is kind of an updated 
Search for the Holy Grail (actual Glasperlenspiel). How to decode Hesse's many 
hints. What are the rules? What if Lilypond is used to play the game? 

One of the characters says: 

The Glass Bead Game, while being set far in the future, is nothing other than 
sets of Leibniz's characteristica universalis identified by competing future 
large language model artificial intelligence, wherein the coding teams who have 
developed each LLM compete by generating serial music using dadaist algorithms 
for their own LLM AI, in which, not the notes, but the large language model 
universal characteristics (post-Platonic forms) can only appear once. 

 

(the character's nickname is "Nothing Other Than"; he's an academic philosopher)

1. Can this general idea (scenario) be tweaked to be more specific? 

(more interesting to the coding community)

2. Is there way to mention Lilypond specifically in this paragraph? 

(e.g. replace everything that follows "wherein")

3. Is there any objection to mentioning Lilypond specifically in the novel?

4. Are there any other novels that mention Lilypond? 

5. How might Lilypond be mentioned in some earlier chapter, to better prepare 
the reader? 

Honestly, No. 5 is entirely my responsibility, but having grown up in a Daoist 
country, I like Sets Of Five. On the other hand, if someone has had an humorous 
personal experience that could be imported into a narrative, I'm all ears. 
Maybe that would be a personal response. 

 

Hesse and dada. Hesse and dharma.

I also welcome personal correspondence about thoughts Lilyponders might have 
about Das Glasperlenspiel (The Glass Bead Game). Because the protagonist is a 
member of a Freemason-like fraternity that has a karaoke room in every lodge, 
often used to sing a cappella rather than karaoke, and the protagonist travels 
frequently, it's easy to introduce a variety of characters with different views 
about music. Historically, Freemasons liked to sing together and had their own 
songbooks. Until 1991, The Sacred Harp contained a 4-page anthem titled 
"Masonic Ode." I'm not a mason, but I'm fascinated with Masonic music. 

 

For the record, I don't use Lilypond to compose music. I use it to write 
poetry. I feel that my first draft of Nothing Other Than's description is 
unsatisfying to people who actually write code. Suggestions welcome.

Pond-fraternally yours,

David Olson
Los Angeles

Reply via email to