I tried several things without success (each in Claude Opus 4.1, Gemini Pro 2.5, and GPT-5):
Yeah, for now you probably need something more specialized. https://electricalexis.github.io/notagen-demo/ can compose music of semi-decent quality, so with the right training a model ought to be able to manage recognition too (although more unconventional music would be harder).
that I wrote out twice as fast as it actually goes,
Music notation rhythms are relative, so I don’t think this has a real meaning? Like, it might be nicer to use half notes as the main beat, and write the tune mostly in quarters, as you did in the Musescore typeset version. But the hand-written version using eighth notes to a quarter note beat conveys basically the same thing (ignoring the triplet issue).
Music notation rhythms are relative, so I don’t think this has a real meaning?
It’s wrong in the sense that it’s violating convention for no good reason, and so is hard for people to read. My intended audience is folk musicians who are really used to tunes in 2⁄2 (and other conventions, like four measures per line), and I’d written in 2⁄4 by accident.
Your last two Musescore files are missing some separation between 1st and 2nd endings
Thanks! I’ve uploaded new versions of them that put the repeat sign between the endings, which is also logically where it belongs.
Yeah, for now you probably need something more specialized. https://electricalexis.github.io/notagen-demo/ can compose music of semi-decent quality, so with the right training a model ought to be able to manage recognition too (although more unconventional music would be harder).
Music notation rhythms are relative, so I don’t think this has a real meaning? Like, it might be nicer to use half notes as the main beat, and write the tune mostly in quarters, as you did in the Musescore typeset version. But the hand-written version using eighth notes to a quarter note beat conveys basically the same thing (ignoring the triplet issue).
Your last two Musescore files are missing some separation between 1st and 2nd endings. Compare the images at https://musescore.org/en/handbook/4/voltas
It’s wrong in the sense that it’s violating convention for no good reason, and so is hard for people to read. My intended audience is folk musicians who are really used to tunes in 2⁄2 (and other conventions, like four measures per line), and I’d written in 2⁄4 by accident.
Thanks! I’ve uploaded new versions of them that put the repeat sign between the endings, which is also logically where it belongs.